or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Teardown of Apple's new Mac Pro reveals socketed, removable Intel CPU
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Teardown of Apple's new Mac Pro reveals socketed, removable Intel CPU - Page 7

post #241 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post


That comment wasn't necessary. Do it again, and you'll get deleted.

 

I am just curious how you (melgross) got on par with mathematica, even if it was meant to be derogatory... There must be some deep inside joke I am missing.

post #242 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post


Looks like the 840 pro is fast enough. You can put one in into a mini. Likely though large files will come on an external drive making this point moot.

 

840 pro is fast, but quite expensive (and sadly, does not fit into mac books), well over half the price of the mini. I would say that once you are monkeying around with the innards of the machine, a hackintosh is a better option.

post #243 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post


I get a lot more than you think. I just don't mind saying what I think. But why would anyone buy a multi thousand dollar workstation to play games on or to edit home movies on? It makes no sense financially, or even for editing purposes. A high end iMac is faster for most uses, and almost as fast for software like iPhoto, and other consumer level video editing apps that can't use all those cores.

If you buy the four core model, there is little advantage to it for the home. A small speed boost for per core use, but not much else. The 300 cards aren't all that fast either. The main advantage would be for those who need vast bandwidth for dual channel Ethernet, or the 6 Thunderbolt 2 ports.

 

A huge advantage of the Mac Pro over the iMac is the form factor -- you can actually easily throw it in the back seat of your car (or your backpack), and take it with you to work or to Aunt Phyllis' house for that show and tell (assuming she has a display you can hook up, which is quite likely these days)/ This is true of the mini (which is, however, much less powerful), but no of the iMac.

post #244 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

XDCAM (I think the guys were doing HD and not HD 422) played back and edited fine on a 2008 MBP using FCP7. I'd be surprised if playback were choppy in a 2012 mini. What issues have you seen and what are you using for playback?

 

2008 Mac Pro 2.8 Quad with 10GB RAM using an internal 7200rpm Seagate drive.

 

A typical file is around 10 seconds or so, output from After Effects using the Animation codec. 1080p, 8-bit x 4 (RGB+A), all keyframes (i.e. no intra-frame compression).

 

If I try to play it with Quick Look or QuickTime it'll play only the first 15-20 frames. The progress bar will continue to move, but the video will be "frozen" on whatever frame it played last. Sometimes it will manage to spit out another single frame somewhere around 7 or 8 seconds in (and then remain hung on that "frozen" frame), but usually it just stays hung up until the end of the file, at which point the display changes to the last frame of the video. It is, in essence, doing the opposite of what's expected. Instead of skipping a few frames while playing most of them, it's skipping most of them while playing only a few.

 

The workaround is to use a Proxy. I just export a 720p version using H.264, cut the sound to that, then marry the finished audio with the original video and render it out. Since the last part doesn't require real-time playback it works fine.

post #245 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

For video playback and basic video chopping, a dedicated GPU won't make a difference. For effects rendering, it can 

 

For effects rendering, is the benefit of a better GPU limited to improving the number of frames per second that can be played in real time or does it actually do part of the computation that would otherwise be done by the CPU?

 

In other words, if I have two systems that are completely identical except for the GPU, and I tell them both to render a complicated effects sequence to disk, with the further assumption that there is no disk speed bottleneck, will the one with the more powerful GPU perform the task more quickly than the machine with the lesser GPU?

post #246 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post
 

2008 Mac Pro 2.8 Quad with 10GB RAM using an internal 7200rpm Seagate drive.

 

A typical file is around 10 seconds or so, output from After Effects using the Animation codec. 1080p, 8-bit x 4 (RGB+A), all keyframes (i.e. no intra-frame compression).

 

Assuming CS6 After Effect has CUDA acceleration for rendering.  If it still has the stock Radeon in it that's not doing you any favors.  AE is RAM hungry but I'm assuming you have at least 8 GB.

 

Given what you write though you aren't generating the animation sequence.  Still if you had AE on your Mac Pro you could handle playback better.  Probably.

 

Quote:
If I try to play it with Quick Look or QuickTime it'll play only the first 15-20 frames. The progress bar will continue to move, but the video will be "frozen" on whatever frame it played last. Sometimes it will manage to spit out another single frame somewhere around 7 or 8 seconds in (and then remain hung on that "frozen" frame), but usually it just stays hung up until the end of the file, at which point the display changes to the last frame of the video. It is, in essence, doing the opposite of what's expected. Instead of skipping a few frames while playing most of them, it's skipping most of them while playing only a few.

 

Having only watched people do this my impression is AE uses RAM preview heavily for smooth playback.  Not something that Quicktime Pro can do.  The animation codec is high quality and very demanding.  My guess is that the normal workflow is to export the animation into the codec being used in FCP (or PP) for edits for smooth editing.

 

I would ask for this file vs (or in addition to) the animation codec. 

 

Quote:
 The workaround is to use a Proxy. I just export a 720p version using H.264, cut the sound to that, then marry the finished audio with the original video and render it out. Since the last part doesn't require real-time playback it works fine

 

Well that's probably the right thing to do.  The best thing to do is ask on creative cow (and not here) whether the Mac Mini will work for you using the exact tool chain and workflow you use. 

post #247 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by marubeni View Post
 

 

I am just curious how you (melgross) got on par with mathematica, even if it was meant to be derogatory... There must be some deep inside joke I am missing.

It was not derogatory. The mathematica reference was due to some of my own nerdy math references. They have nothing to do with him (just clearing that up and hopefully my mentioning that doesn't result in post disappearance).

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post
 

 

Assuming CS6 After Effect has CUDA acceleration for rendering.  If it still has the stock Radeon in it that's not doing you any favors.  AE is RAM hungry but I'm assuming you have at least 8 GB.

 

Given what you write though you aren't generating the animation sequence.  Still if you had AE on your Mac Pro you could handle playback better.  Probably.

 

 

Part of the reason it showed up that way was due to NVidia doing a portion of the work. They had some experience with raytracing on CUDA. For example they own the remnants of Mental Images and that IP, which resulted in iray. They had some experience from gelato, and they do offer a number of things in the way of libraries.

Quote:
Well that's probably the right thing to do.  The best thing to do is ask on creative cow (and not here) whether the Mac Mini will work for you using the exact tool chain and workflow you use. 

That is a good idea, but the recent "which mac should I buy" threads seem to be light on responses. I just checked.

post #248 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

The $2749 27" iMac is indeed $2749.  If you add FCPX then it's more but that's immaterial if you aren't going to use FCPX.  The POINT is that iMovie and FCPX are now very similar under the hood.  The comment that "consumer grade video software" won't use all the cores is likely no longer true for iMovie 13.  


If you want to add $500 to the price of the Mac Pro for the monitor keyboard and mouse that would be fair.  That makes the monetary equation:


$2749 for the iMac vs $3599 for the Mac Pro.  Higher but you get to pick which monitor you want.


None of the choices are $3900. I have no idea why you cannot add.  

My addition is perfect. You are trying to make it look cheaper than it really is by pretending the monitor is seperate, as though you can use the Mac Pro without one, but that you can add one if you want to.

I simply used your own choice for a monitor for the price. That's another $700. I could have added the Sharp that Apple sells for this at $3,500, but I didn't.

So add the monitor, and the price goes up by that amount, I'm sure you know this. The iMac obviously doesn't need a monitor, so that price remains the same. Why would you by a Mac Pro and not go 4k? Seems a waste of graphics abilities. It's disingenuous to act as though the purchase price of a new Mac Pro wouldn't include a new decent quality monitor. The Dell will be decent! but not by any means pro grade. That will cost one much more.

So let's try to be fair, ok? Include everything you need for a new installation.
post #249 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by marubeni View Post

I am just curious how you (melgross) got on par with mathematica, even if it was meant to be derogatory... There must be some deep inside joke I am missing.

Since the comment really was "melgross or Mathematica", I think the dig was obvious. At least I apologized for my somewhat over the top response earlier, I think responding the way I did to that comment was appropriate.

At any rate, people need to learn to be smart around mods. I'm pretty good in allowing comments, as are some others here. But some web sites will ban you for even questioning what a mod said. But do t take advantage of it here.
post #250 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post


Since the comment really was "melgross or Mathematica", I think the dig was obvious. At least I apologized for my somewhat over the top response earlier, I think responding the way I did to that comment was appropriate.

At any rate, people need to learn to be smart around mods. I'm pretty good in allowing comments, as are some others here. But some web sites will ban you for even questioning what a mod said. But do t take advantage of it here.

 

The dig eludes me completely. Mathematica is one program that CAN use the Mac Pro, since it can use the GPUs for computation. It can also (for most things I do with it) can use all the parallelism you can throw at it, and it can CERTAINLY use all the cache.

post #251 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post


Since the comment really was "melgross or Mathematica", I think the dig was obvious. 

 

We don't get along but frankly I don't get it. 

 

I wouldn't call you Mathematica on a good day as I find Mathematica useful.

post #252 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

My addition is perfect. You are trying to make it look cheaper than it really is by pretending the monitor is seperate, as though you can use the Mac Pro without one, but that you can add one if you want to.

I simply used your own choice for a monitor for the price. That's another $700. I could have added the Sharp that Apple sells for this at $3,500, but I didn't.

So add the monitor, and the price goes up by that amount, I'm sure you know this. The iMac obviously doesn't need a monitor, so that price remains the same. Why would you by a Mac Pro and not go 4k? Seems a waste of graphics abilities. It's disingenuous to act as though the purchase price of a new Mac Pro wouldn't include a new decent quality monitor. The Dell will be decent! but not by any means pro grade. That will cost one much more.

So let's try to be fair, ok? Include everything you need for a new installation.

 

If I got a Mac Pro I probably wouldn't go 4K with it.  No reason to at the moment. Nor could the iMac do so anyway.

 

I don't have a problem with adding $720 for a brand new installation for a decent 27" display, keyboard and mouse.  That's a 27" U2713HM 2560x1440 IPS monitor for $580 + $140 for keyboard and mouse.  And yes, this is pro grade.  Or at least as pro grade as the iMac display.

 

However you STILL don't get to $3,900 even if you charged $700.  I dunno what you are adding to get to $3900.  Nor can you add FCP to the price without adding it to both sides.

 

Frankly the Mac Pro arguably represents a far better value than the top end iMac for the home purchaser.  Both are very expensive machines but the Mac Pro has more potential longevity. 

post #253 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by comley View Post

IFixit 8 / 10

Yeah. That was kind of a shock. In the past, it just seemed like they were looking for reasons to dock points from Apple's repairability ratings. In this case, I don't know, it seems almost generous in comparison. One can easily get inside and swap parts, but many of the parts have no alternative source, at least not yet.
post #254 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

2008 Mac Pro 2.8 Quad with 10GB RAM using an internal 7200rpm Seagate drive.

A typical file is around 10 seconds or so, output from After Effects using the Animation codec. 1080p, 8-bit x 4 (RGB+A), all keyframes (i.e. no intra-frame compression).

If I try to play it with Quick Look or QuickTime it'll play only the first 15-20 frames.

If you run the Blackmagic speed test, what is the rating you get for the 7200 rpm drive?

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/blackmagic-disk-speed-test/id425264550?mt=12

Also, if you open the inspector window in Quicktime, what does it say is the bitrate for the video?

You can also try using ProRes 4444, 422, 422LT and 422Proxy at 1080p and see how they run. I think 4444 will have trouble on a 7200 rpm drive but try it anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v 
For effects rendering, is the benefit of a better GPU limited to improving the number of frames per second that can be played in real time or does it actually do part of the computation that would otherwise be done by the CPU?

In other words, if I have two systems that are completely identical except for the GPU, and I tell them both to render a complicated effects sequence to disk, with the further assumption that there is no disk speed bottleneck, will the one with the more powerful GPU perform the task more quickly than the machine with the lesser GPU?

It depends on the program but when effects can be rendered on the GPU, having a better GPU helps.
post #255 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Yeah. That was kind of a shock. In the past, it just seemed like they were looking for reasons to dock points from Apple's repairability ratings. In this case, I don't know, it seems almost generous in comparison. One can easily get inside and swap parts, but many of the parts have no alternative source, at least not yet.

I can ask them but I think it's based solely on the replaceability (not so much upgradability) of core components, which does mean the Mac Pro is good from Even desktop PC standards.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #256 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by marubeni View Post

The dig eludes me completely. Mathematica is one program that CAN use the Mac Pro, since it can use the GPUs for computation. It can also (for most things I do with it) can use all the parallelism you can throw at it, and it can CERTAINLY use all the cache.

Ok, let's drop it, shall we? If you didn't understand the dig, that's fine. I did.
post #257 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

We don't get along but frankly I don't get it. 

I wouldn't call you Mathematica on a good day as I find Mathematica useful.

Well, by that comment on your part, we can see why we don't get along, don't we?
post #258 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

If I got a Mac Pro I probably wouldn't go 4K with it.  No reason to at the moment. Nor could the iMac do so anyway.

I don't have a problem with adding $720 for a brand new installation for a decent 27" display, keyboard and mouse.  That's a 27" U2713HM 2560x1440 IPS monitor for $580 + $14
0 for keyboard and mouse.  And yes, this is pro grade.  Or at least as pro grade as the iMac display.


However you STILL don't get to $3,900 even if you charged $700.  I dunno what you are adding to get to $3900.  Nor can you add FCP to the price without adding it to both sides.

Frankly the Mac Pro arguably represents a far better value than the top end iMac for the home purchaser.  Both are very expensive machines but the Mac Pro has more potential longevity. 

I don't understand how you don't come to $3900, which would be a rounded off number, of course.

You use $3099 as your base.

Then we add the $699 for the monitor you selected.

Then a keyboard and mouse is about $100, depending on whether you're buying wireless models or not.

That adds to $3900. Where's the problem? It's what I said in the first post.

But now, you're changing the game here. Stick to your first selection for a monitor. And if you're going to buy a Mac Pro, buy a real keyboard and mouse, not some cheap junk. One for FCP specifically, is over $100 by itself, and some are more, depending on how high a quality model you really need. Apple's is considered to be very good, and I agree with that.
post #259 of 281
http://www.apple.com/mac-pro/specs/

I'll be news my TV as a monitor
Edited by comley - 1/12/14 at 10:51pm
post #260 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Yeah. That was kind of a shock. In the past, it just seemed like they were looking for reasons to dock points from Apple's repairability ratings. In this case, I don't know, it seems almost generous in comparison. One can easily get inside and swap parts, but many of the parts have no alternative source, at least not yet.
I agree
post #261 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

If you run the Blackmagic speed test, what is the rating you get for the 7200 rpm drive?

 

~97MB/s both in and out.

 

Just for giggles I moved the video to another drive -- a Sonnet 4-bay eSATA enclosure set up as RAID10. It's connected to the Mac through a Sonnet PCIe eSATA card. That rig still only managed writes of under 100MB/s and reads only improved to 130MB/s. That surprised me. I expected better out of a striped pair of Seagates.

 

What's really weird is that the files play when coming off the RAID, but they stutter and play at reduced speed (eg. a 10 second file takes about 15 seconds to play through). Then there's the really, REALLY weird part: the video continues playing AFTER the QuickTime Player progress bar has reached the end! It's like the progress bar is moving at actual speed whereas the video is slowed down, so the progress bar finishes before the video! Is that screwy or what?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Also, if you open the inspector window in Quicktime, what does it say is the bitrate for the video?
 
Depends on the item. One with just animated characters is 500MB/s, whereas one with lots of fast-moving video is 1.2GB/s!!!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

You can also try using ProRes 4444, 422, 422LT and 422Proxy at 1080p and see how they run.
 

No I can't, because (A) I'm not the one generating the video files, and (B) other devices in the workflow specifically REQUIRE the Animation codec with no i-frames.


Edited by v5v - 1/13/14 at 10:44pm
post #262 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

~97MB/s both in and out.

Just for giggles I moved the video to another drive -- a Sonnet 4-bay eSATA enclosure set up as RAID10. It's connected to the Mac through a Sonnet PCIe eSATA card. That rig still only managed writes of under 100MB/s and reads only improved to 130MB/s. That surprised me. I expected better out of a striped pair of Seagates.

What's really weird is that the files play when coming off the RAID, but they stutter and play at reduced speed (eg. a 10 second file takes about 15 seconds to play through). Then there's the really, REALLY weird part: the video continues playing AFTER the QuickTime Player progress bar has reached the end! It's like the progress bar is moving at actual speed whereas the video is slowed down, so the progress bar finishes before the video! Is that screwy or what?

Yeah that's a bit strange with Quicktime. I don't suppose it has much option but to keep playing the frames and just wait until the drive has sent them. Drive speeds vary with platter density. Older 7200 rpm drives are slower than new high capacity ones so the RAID could easily be using older drives that would normally get 50-60MB/s on their own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

Depends on the item. One with just animated characters is 500MB/s, whereas one with lots of fast-moving video is 1.2GB/s!!!

The bitrates in the inspector are in bits/s whereas the drive speeds are bytes/s so the you'd divide those by 8. That should make them 62.5MB/s and 150MB/s average.

The drive benchmarks tend to show peak sequential reads/writes though and it's not going to be the case that it will always perform at peak. SSDs are cheap enough now. For something as critical to workflow, you can even get a lower capacity one to use as a drive for reading the files:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00BQ8RHJ2
http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Electronics-EVO-Series-2-5-Inch-MZ-7TE500BW/dp/B00E3W19MO
http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Electronics-Series-2-5-Inch-MZ-7PD256BW/dp/B009NB8WRU

If you have a free internal drive slot in the Mac Pro, it can sit in one with an adaptor or there are desktop models:

http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Electronics-EVO-Series-2-5-Inch-MZ-7TE250KW/dp/B00E391E7W

It'll only go up to 3Gbps (375MB/s and there are some other overheads) as the old Mac Pro used an older SATA connector but that should be fast enough to play back the files.
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

No I can't, because (A) I'm not the one generating the video files, and (B) other devices in the workflow specifically REQUIRE the Animation codec with no i-frames.

I was just meaning as a test on the clips you have to see which bitrate will playback smoothly on the drive to give you an idea of what the maximum your setup can work with.

Another thing to try would be putting the files on a RAM disk, there's an app linked on this page to create one easily:

http://www.tekrevue.com/tip/how-to-create-a-4gbs-ram-disk-in-mac-os-x/

You have 10GB of RAM so you can try making one big enough to host one or two files and check your playback speed. If your laptop had 16GB of RAM, you could do it there too or just replace the internal drive with an SSD.
post #263 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post


I don't understand how you don't come to $3900, which would be a rounded off number, of course.

You use $3099 as your base.

Then we add the $699 for the monitor you selected.

Then a keyboard and mouse is about $100, depending on whether you're buying wireless models or not.

That adds to $3900. Where's the problem? It's what I said in the first post.

But now, you're changing the game here. Stick to your first selection for a monitor. And if you're going to buy a Mac Pro, buy a real keyboard and mouse, not some cheap junk. One for FCP specifically, is over $100 by itself, and some are more, depending on how high a quality model you really need. Apple's is considered to be very good, and I agree with that.

 

Okay, you're right.  What threw me is that I never intended to use the $700 monitor as the baseline since the iMac can't do 4K and always figured keyboard+mouse was $140 since that's the price from Apple.

 

Either way the Mac Pro is still a decent deal vs the iMac and not some idiotic or vainglorious purchase as you assert.

post #264 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Another thing to try would be putting the files on a RAM disk, there's an app linked on this page to create one easily:

http://www.tekrevue.com/tip/how-to-create-a-4gbs-ram-disk-in-mac-os-x/

You have 10GB of RAM so you can try making one big enough to host one or two files and check your playback speed. If your laptop had 16GB of RAM, you could do it there too or just replace the internal drive with an SSD.

 

RAM disk is the way to go to test a smaller file.  Then you'll know if IO is the issue vs something else.

 

Its a moderate shame that the new Mac pro only has 4 ram slots.

post #265 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

I was just meaning as a test on the clips you have to see which bitrate will playback smoothly on the drive to give you an idea of what the maximum your setup can work with.

Another thing to try would be putting the files on a RAM disk, there's an app linked on this page to create one easily:

http://www.tekrevue.com/tip/how-to-create-a-4gbs-ram-disk-in-mac-os-x/

You have 10GB of RAM so you can try making one big enough to host one or two files and check your playback speed. If your laptop had 16GB of RAM, you could do it there too or just replace the internal drive with an SSD.
RAM disk is the way to go to test a smaller file.  Then you'll know if IO is the issue vs something else.

Its a moderate shame that the new Mac pro only has 4 ram slots.

Fascinating. I have never used a RAM disk but now I want to set one up and give is a go. Any sites that show real world performance comparisons?

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #266 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Fascinating. I have never used a RAM disk but now I want to set one up and give is a go. Any sites that show real world performance comparisons?

 

http://www.pcper.com/news/Storage/AMD-Launches-Radeon-RAMDisk-Free-6GB-Disks-AMD-Memory

 

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=355016

 

RAM disks is how we used to supercharge database access.  Of course those were expensive PCIe cards with battery and flash backup incase power went out.

post #267 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post
 

 

Personally I'd still get the Mac Pro for your use with the quad core and upgrade to the D700.  There will simply be things you can do on that that you cannot on the iMac.  Like with the mini you may find that the iMacs you buy today simply will not hold up to the use you will have for tomorrow. 

 

 

 

Thanks for prodding me to think again; I needed it.  As I haven't ordered yet, I have some time to weigh options again.

 

Spent the past few days really working in FCPX and found myself wondering how much of a boost the hex with D700's would be.  I will not be going to 4K in the next couple of years (just bought a nice full HD cam), but I do like to play with some effects, which send the machine into rendering for a while.  Compressor has easier to configure distributive rendering now so that is nice; can keep the current iMac around to help out.

 

Then I spent some time looking for a decent display.  Sadly, where I live there are not many shops that have display displays (sorry, I had to!) and the ones that do don't offer a wide variety, with the vast majority being cheaper ones or just 1920x1080.  I want something on par with the current iMac, but hopefully with even less gloss.

 

Online I saw a few from BenQ and Asus that are 27" and WQHD (same pixel count as the iMac).

 

This one looks interesting, but I can't find a demo model within 200 miles.  

http://www.benq.com/product/monitor/BL2710PT/

 

It has the following connections:

D-Sub/ DVI/ DP/ HDMI/ Headphone jack /Line-in

What is best for connecting a Mac?  Is there a cable that connects mini DP to DP?

 

This one has a built-in card reader, and slightly different specs that I have little clue about.

http://www.asus.com/us/Monitors_Projectors/PA279Q/

 

Can you guys suggest any displays?


Edited by Bergermeister - 1/14/14 at 8:24pm

 

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 #268 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post
 

Thanks for prodding me to think again; I needed it.  As I haven't ordered yet, I have some time to weigh options again.

...

I want something on par with the current iMac, but hopefully with even less gloss.

 

Try using your iMac in target display mode with one of your mini's and see if you like that.  

 

You're short on space and want to keep the 27" iMac around anyway...I have the logitech K760 keyboard that I share between my MBP and Mini.  It can remain paired with three computers which is sometimes handier than remoting into another machine...

 

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3924?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_US

post #269 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post
 

 

Try using your iMac in target display mode with one of your mini's and see if you like that.  

 

You're short on space and want to keep the 27" iMac around anyway...I have the logitech K760 keyboard that I share between my MBP and Mini.  It can remain paired with three computers which is sometimes handier than remoting into another machine...

 

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3924?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_US

 

I knew TDM was possible but had never actually tried it.  Had just used share display, which has severe lag at times but for my uses worked well enough.  Remote Desktop was a little better.

 

TDM is crystal clear! 

 

Today I actually looked at Logitec keyboards at a shop before I saw your message.  Does your keyboard toggle TDM correctly?  The Apple support page you sent me to of course says that non Apple boards might not work... 

 

Have you looked at this one from Kanex?

http://www.kanexlive.com/keyboard

 

Most of the time I use the mini keyboard, but there are some tasks that I want a full keyboard for.

 

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 #270 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Had just used share display, which has severe lag at times but for my uses worked well enough.

I had that lag as well. Got a new Airport, problem solved.
Quote:
Have you looked at this one from Kanex?

Cool keyboard! And the company has humor too; I don't have Flash installed:

I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #271 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post


I had that lag as well. Got a new Airport, problem solved.
Cool keyboard! And the company has humor too; I don't have Flash installed:

 

I didn't see that!  Loads on my iMac, but the vid just keeps loading and reloading on my iPad.

 

The price in Japan is double the price in the US.  Major Bummer.  

 

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 #272 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

I didn't see that!  Loads on my iMac, but the vid just keeps loading and reloading on my iPad.

Hence the semicolon (no Flash installed).
Quote:
The price in Japan is double the price in the US.  Major Bummer.  

That's preposterous. I know CE are more expensive here in Europe compared to the States, but double? Or about, I presume. Can importing it be cheaper? A friend bringing it over? Or will it be taxed anyway, negating the hassle.
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #273 of 281

Amazon Japan has it for about $120.  I'm still looking for another dealer.  Usually things aren't bad here, but every now and then you get a greedy importer that then only deals through a limited number of outlets, keeping the price high.  

 

Will consider getting a a new Airport device (called AirMac here in Japan because of some reason).

 

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 #274 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Amazon Japan has it for about $120.  I'm still looking for another dealer.  Usually things aren't bad here, but every now and then you get a greedy importer that then only deals through a limited number of outlets, keeping the price high.  

Will consider getting a a new Airport device (called AirMac here in Japan because of some reason).

Ah, ok, hope you'll find a better deal.

Strange, 'AirMac'. I wish they would make one, a Mac in the Air. So I can store all my iTunes Media in there, accessible from anywhere (AnyAir?) in my home and over cellular if needed. Play videos at a friends' house over their WiFi. So, I guess, basically, 'iTunes in the Air'.
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #275 of 281

My daily head bashing and flip-flopping over which computer to get ended today: I dove head first and ordered a Mac Pro 6-core, 32GB RAM, 1TB storage, D700s.  Now starts the daily head bashing over how to pay for it.  8-)   FinallyI can get back to work and have a couple of projects ready for the new Render Beast  (genus and species pending) when it arrives some time next month (very open ended delivery date: February).  

 

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 #276 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post


Ah, ok, hope you'll find a better deal.

Strange, 'AirMac'. I wish they would make one, a Mac in the Air. So I can store all my iTunes Media in there, accessible from anywhere (AnyAir?) in my home and over cellular if needed. Play videos at a friends' house over their WiFi. So, I guess, basically, 'iTunes in the Air'.

 

My shop is checking to see if they can order it; they used to deal with that importer but ...

 

AirPort is already registered in Japan, if memory serves, thus the name change.  When I first heard AirMac, though, I thought it was some kind of diet burger at McDonald's, as if that is possible.  Speaking of burgers, I think I'll have dinner at Mos Burger tonight... 

 

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 #277 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

My daily head bashing and flip-flopping over which computer to get ended today: I dove head first and ordered a Mac Pro 6-core, 32GB RAM, 1TB storage, D700s.  Now starts the daily head bashing over how to pay for it.  
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies/1cool.gif" style="line-height:1.4em;">
   FinallyI can get back to work and have a couple of projects ready for the new Render Beast  (genus and species pending) when it arrives some time next month (very open ended delivery date: February).  

YES! You did it! Cool, and D700, 1TB, 6-core...all good man, all good. Boy are you in for a treat. I understand from last years' iMac waiting discussion your large storage is external anyway, so no direct need for even more purchases? Anyhoo, congrats on the decision making; when dabbling on what to get it always is a good thing to do and secondly you somehow feel 'relieved of duty' when you hit that Submit button. Enjoy.
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #278 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post
 

My daily head bashing and flip-flopping over which computer to get ended today: I dove head first and ordered a Mac Pro 6-core, 32GB RAM, 1TB storage, D700s.  Now starts the daily head bashing over how to pay for it.  8-)   FinallyI can get back to work and have a couple of projects ready for the new Render Beast  (genus and species pending) when it arrives some time next month (very open ended delivery date: February).  

 

Do you really need that firstborn?

post #279 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by marubeni View Post
 

 

Do you really need that firstborn?

 

Yup.

 

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 #280 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post
 

 

Try using your iMac in target display mode with one of your mini's and see if you like that.  

 

You're short on space and want to keep the 27" iMac around anyway...I have the logitech K760 keyboard that I share between my MBP and Mini.  It can remain paired with three computers which is sometimes handier than remoting into another machine...

 

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3924?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_US

 

Just got my K811 tonight.  It's pretty nice, but I have to get used to using an American layout again!  I've been on Japanese keyboards for years; the larger return key is useful.

 

One question: I can't seem to use Command F2 to change to target display mode; I'm testing it with the iMac and the mini  It works fine on my Apple keyboard.  Does yours work?

 

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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Teardown of Apple's new Mac Pro reveals socketed, removable Intel CPU