or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple's Mac Pro ship times improve to 3-4 weeks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's Mac Pro ship times improve to 3-4 weeks

post #1 of 39
Thread Starter 
Exactly one week after Apple improved shipping estimates for its flagship Mac Pro desktop to three to five weeks, the company has again cut down on wait times with orders now showing delivery dates of less than one month.



Demand for Apple's redesigned Mac Pro has been outstripping supply since its debut in December, but a look at the Online Apple Store shows Apple is quickly catching up.

Spotted by AppleInsider reader Rolando, all configurations are now available within three to four weeks, the new estimates bring estimated shipping times to one month or below for the first time since launch.

Ship-by dates have slowly improved over the past few months, with checks in April showing estimates at 5-6 weeks, which moved up to 4-6 weeks on Apr. 11 and 4-5 weeks on Apr. 18. Last week Apple improved availability to 3-5 weeks.

The Online Apple Store is still the only place to buy the most powerful Mac ever as in-store supplies are non-existent. In January, Apple said it didn't expect to have models available at brick-and-mortar Apple Stores until at least March. In hindsight that guess was a bit optimistic.

As Apple stocks up on inventory, authorized resellers like MacMall and Adorama have limited supplies of select Mac Pro configurations, which can be seen in AppleInsider's live Price Guides.
post #2 of 39
Now that they finally have a truly new Mac Pro I expect we will likely start seeing upgrades far more often than in the past. It is likely an 8 or possibly even a 12 core version will appear. Looks like all those people that said no one uses a desktop Mac anymore were dead wrong if they can't even meet demand. I realize the MP sells in tiny numbers compared to a Macbook Air but still a good sign.

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply
post #3 of 39

Yeah, but the wait times on existing orders didn't drop.

 

What this means is a *whole lot* of these will be going out at the end of this month, basically anything ordered in the last two months.

 

Which is kinda interesting.

post #4 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

Now that they finally have a truly new Mac Pro I expect we will likely start seeing upgrades far more often than in the past. It is likely an 8 or possibly even a 12 core version will appear. Looks like all those people that said no one uses a desktop Mac anymore were dead wrong if they can't even meet demand. I realize the MP sells in tiny numbers compared to a Macbook Air but still a good sign.

Where've you been? 8- and 12-core versions have been available for months. To me it seems more likely that the U.S. production facility was so slow that even meager demand couldn't be met. 

 

When will we see dual-processor Mac Pros?

post #5 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post
 

Where've you been? 8- and 12-core versions have been available for months. To me it seems more likely that the U.S. production facility was so slow that even meager demand couldn't be met. 

 

When will we see dual-processor Mac Pros?

I should have said dual 12 core. 

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply
post #6 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

I should have said dual 12 core. 

Don't you just hate words out. I do it the time 1wink.gif
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #7 of 39

Still waiting for an Apple 4K monitor. The Sharp 4K in the Apple store is getting Meh reviews. Even some of the people who give it five stars still find something to complain about. I'll wait. My 2008 MP with 30" Cinema is cranking along just fine.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #8 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post
 
When will we see dual-processor Mac Pros?

I don't think the chassis is designed for that.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #9 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
 

I don't think the chassis is designed for that.

But what's stopping Apple?

post #10 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

But what's stopping Apple?

Cost and need come to mind. Have you priced those processors? And everyone I know that is buying a Mac Pro isn't seeing any benefit from buying anything more than a quad-core.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #11 of 39
I've been hoping all along since I had seen this design that the new Mac Mini would be a smaller version of this form factor with 4k support. If that is going to be the case they would need to meet demand for the Pro version first I would think.

I''m watching the rumors for signs of this because I would love to upgrade my current mini that's used almost expressly for my home theater/entertainment.

Just something I've been wishing for, that's all. 1smile.gif
post #12 of 39
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post
But what's stopping Apple?

 

The chassis. You’d have to have either dual CPU+single GPU or single CPU+dual GPU, but the latter is what Apple found most people use.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #13 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

Now that they finally have a truly new Mac Pro I expect we will likely start seeing upgrades far more often than in the past. It is likely an 8 or possibly even a 12 core version will appear.

You really have no idea what you are talking about.  The current Mac Pro already exists as an 8 or 12 core CPU.  Build to order and choose either 8 or 12 cores.

post #14 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
 

Still waiting for an Apple 4K monitor. The Sharp 4K in the Apple store is getting Meh reviews. Even some of the people who give it five stars still find something to complain about. I'll wait. My 2008 MP with 30" Cinema is cranking along just fine.

Apple does not make LCD panels.  An Apple-branded LCD would likely have a panel made by Sharp.

post #15 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post
 

Where've you been? 8- and 12-core versions have been available for months. To me it seems more likely that the U.S. production facility was so slow that even meager demand couldn't be met. 

 

When will we see dual-processor Mac Pros?

"meager demand"?  And what's that based on?  do you know how many units they've shipped, how many are on order?   They obviously have more orders than they can fulfill, which is all we know.  These high end computers don't represent the majority of computers sold, since they are automatically a more niche workstation.  I wonder how HP, Dell and others are doing with their comparable workstations in terms of unit sales of similar configurations.

 

I don't know if Apple has plans for a dual-processor MacPro since the cost associated with it is rather high, there isn't enough demand is what I think would be the reasons.  The types of apps that most of their users are using are more graphic intensive than CPU intensive is one possible reason.  If they did make on, the case would have to be big enough to but 4 boards inside with a big enough heat sink, a larger fan, etc.  I don't know if they would sell enough to make it worthwhile.  They don't have enough room inside with 2 GPU cards, which I think is their direction.   Just a hunch.

post #16 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
 

Still waiting for an Apple 4K monitor. The Sharp 4K in the Apple store is getting Meh reviews. Even some of the people who give it five stars still find something to complain about. I'll wait. My 2008 MP with 30" Cinema is cranking along just fine.

You do realize that Apple won't actually be "making" the displays, right?

So no point for Apple to put these out until Sharp, LG, Samsung, or somebody makes one that looks fantastico. (and at a price)

post #17 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillstones View Post
 
Apple does not make LCD panels.  An Apple-branded LCD would likely have a panel made by Sharp.

Yeah, but it would be much higher build quality and probably better electronics as well.  Right now all of the 4K monitors are glitchy and the Sharp one is really cheap plastic. The chips are not there yet. They are using multiple chips and tiling the output to get to 4K and no one has anything better than 60 Hz. Mostly people are saying it is a little choppy for a monitor although fine for a TV.  I'm not going to be an early adopter this time.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #18 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Mostly people are saying it is a little choppy for a monitor although fine for a TV.  I'm not going to be an early adopter this time.

But how much of that is the monitor and how much the "PC"? Apple isn't officially supporting UHD@60Hz in the Late-2013 MBPs until 10.9.3.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #19 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
 And everyone I know that is buying a Mac Pro isn't seeing any benefit from buying anything more than a quad-core.

Actually the quad-core is faster because it is clocked higher. If you are rendering long movies in FCP X then the higher cores will kick in. For regular Adobe CC work the quad-core is faster.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #20 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillstones View Post
 

You really have no idea what you are talking about.  The current Mac Pro already exists as an 8 or 12 core CPU.  Build to order and choose either 8 or 12 cores.

 

Who peed in your wheaties? Calm down and take a few deep breaths then you will notice that I clarified what I meant shortly below my first post. 

Then click this link because I think it might be of value. 

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply
post #21 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

"meager demand"?  And what's that based on?  do you know how many units they've shipped, how many are on order?   They obviously have more orders than they can fulfill, which is all we know.

Duh.

 

Yes, I've priced the processors Apple uses (actually more expensive ones that are dual-processor-capable, which the ones in the Mac Pro are not). A dual 12-core system with a decent graphics card (for graphics only) costs less than Apple's top of the line Mac Pro and smokes it performance-wise.

post #22 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post
 

Yes, I've priced the processors Apple uses (actually more expensive ones that are dual-processor-capable, which the ones in the Mac Pro are not). A dual 12-core system with a decent graphics card (for graphics only) costs less than Apple's top of the line Mac Pro and smokes it performance-wise.

Performance is relative to the application you are using. Let's say for sake of example that we are rendering movies. Me, on a 12 core Mac Pro using FCP X and you on a dual 12-core PC using Avid or Premiere on Windows 8. What do you think the difference would be rendering a 15 second TV commercial, or a 1 hour 4K documentary? Right, you can't answer that question because you don't own a dual 12-core machine or a Mac Pro. Unless you have some laboratory controlled application specific comparisons you are just speculating. Mac Pro is super fast and runs OS X which is preferable to running Windows on any hardware to many media and graphics professionals, so you can take your higher spec'ed machine and go play a video game, we professionals really don't care about raw specs.


Edited by mstone - 5/1/14 at 7:18pm

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #23 of 39
Ship times improve to 3-4 weeks from 3 - 5 weeks.

That is more like rewording things rather then improvement.
post #24 of 39
Quote:
When will we see dual-processor Mac Pros?

Instead of buying dual processors, why not just configure a MacPro with more cores? Do you really need more than 12 cores?

I'd like to think the next revision will use the Intel Xeon E7 which can be configured with 15 cores (30 threads).

http://ark.intel.com/products/75258

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #25 of 39

I'm using two of the Sharp 4k monitors right now on my new 12-core Mac Pro... anyone that is complaining about them doesn't know what they're talking about.  Great color.  Great viewing angles.  4k at 60hz.  And of course: TONS OF PIXELS!


I think people just don't know how to configure them.  You have to go into the menu on the monitor and turn on MultiStreamTransport (MST) to get 60hz.  As usual... people don't even read the documentation before complaining.

 

My older 12-core Mac Pro has 3x30" Dell monitors on it... and they look ancient when I switch over to that machine.  4k is definitely the future.

 

I also just ordered 2x28" Samsung 4k monitors to try those out on my other new 12-core Mac Pro which should be showing up any day now (hopefully this story means it will show up faster!).  I'll be able to compare the cheap ($700!) Samsung's against the expensive (over $3000) Sharps... we'll see how that goes.

post #26 of 39

Oh - and if you think that no one uses these things I'm currently running a simulation that is using 30GB of RAM and is destroying all 12 cores.  If they would have made a 24-core Mac Pro I definitely would have bought that.

 

Oh - and I have done the pricing on dual 12-core Linux workstations.  To get one similarly configured from a reputable builder (like Boxx) it's about $12k to $13k.  Now - that's not THAT far above the ~$8k I pay for the Mac Workstations... but it's not for free either.

 

I did price out a "build my own" and I could build a dual 12-core system myself with good parts for about $9k to $10k (yes, you can do it cheaper if you cheap out on a few components - but when we're talking about a machine that I rely on for work I would never try to shave $1k off to get inferior parts).

 

Ultimately, being able to use OSX and have all the Thunderbolt goodness... and being able to jack in multiple 4k monitors (and have them actually work out of the box) swayed me to go Mac again...

 

In a few years I'll do that math again and see where I end up....

post #27 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post
 

Duh.

 

Yes, I've priced the processors Apple uses (actually more expensive ones that are dual-processor-capable, which the ones in the Mac Pro are not). A dual 12-core system with a decent graphics card (for graphics only) costs less than Apple's top of the line Mac Pro and smokes it performance-wise.

It's not just the price of the processors, it's the rest of it that goes along with the box.  They'd need a bigger case, more expensive cooling and at the end, it may not really yield that much better performance for the amount they would have to charge, and the amount of units they'd actually sell, wouldn't be desirable enough at this time.  They are obviously going after a targeted market and that targeted market doesn't need as much CPU power as they do GPU power.  What apps that are commonly used on OS X that would take advantage of dual processing vs GPU processing?   Sure, there is an advantage of dual processing, but it's not twice as fast, but with everything involved, it would be almost 2x as much to make. (bigger case, more expensive cooling system, processors, and processor boards, and power supply).  Would the added cost and performance be worthwhile is the question.  Just looking at just the processor isn't enough to look at when costing these out.   There's a lot more involved than that.  And how many additional units would they actually sell?  From the articles and reviews i've read and having talked to some people that do video production, the units they have out now are perfectly fine for up to 4K video production without too much trouble.  Adding a second CPU might not be that advantageous.  The Top end audio production people generally use Pro Tools HD cards, which do the processing, OR the top end system that's out is perfectly capable of doing the most processor intensive recording I can think of.  It can handle lots of tracks/plug-ins that even the most demanding project could handle without the ProTools cards.  so, I would have to look at what apps would greatly benefit from dual processing that would be done on a MacPro.     My understanding is that Apple still has a ways to go to make OS X more friendly with dual processing as its not where it could be as far as efficiency.  But since I'm not a programmer, I have to rely on those that are, so this is what I've been told by programmers that I've talked to.

post #28 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

Now that they finally have a truly new Mac Pro I expect we will likely start seeing upgrades far more often than in the past.
I would hope so but they won't come any faster than Intel and AMD can deliver the updates. At best you will get a major update about every two years. It is a simple fact of life that this caliber of hardware does not get revved the way consumer grade components do.
Quote:
It is likely an 8 or possibly even a 12 core version will appear.
Actually the newest Intel XEONs come with processor complexes grouped in units of five cores so I would imagine next years Macs would have 5, 10, 15 & possibly 20 cores.
Quote:
Looks like all those people that said no one uses a desktop Mac anymore were dead wrong if they can't even meet demand.
You have no idea what demand is, Apple could just as well be bottlenecked somewhere else.
Quote:
I realize the MP sells in tiny numbers compared to a Macbook Air but still a good sign.

Well we can hope that it is a good sign. Honestly though I like to think of this machine as proof of concept, when Apple has access to the next process shrinks this machine should really come into its own.
post #29 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

I should have said dual 12 core. 

I really doubt that you will ever see a dual socket machine. I fully expect that the next round or two of XEONs will keep people happy for a long while. A 20 core chip shouldn't be far away.
post #30 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Cost and need come to mind. Have you priced those processors? And everyone I know that is buying a Mac Pro isn't seeing any benefit from buying anything more than a quad-core.

Honestly if they can't leverage the cores then they didn't need a Mac Pro in the first place.
post #31 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Actually the newest Intel XEONs come with processor complexes grouped in units of five cores so I would imagine next years Macs would have 5, 10, 15 & possibly 20 cores.

Will the chipsets get smaller and more power efficient as they reduce the nodes or will they just add more features to keep them around the same size? I ask because I wonder if Apple's longterm plan with this Mac Pro is to place two chips next to each other on the CPU board.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #32 of 39

Where are all the MacPro haters that were infesting this forum a few months ago?  They are conveniently nowhere to  be seen?  Looks like this machine is more popular that these basement-dwellers were expecting... Again!!  Where are the crybabies screaming on how they can build a franken-PC with desktop (not workstation) class chips, with more RAM (not ECC-RAM), and more capacity (not SSD) than Apple and at 1/4 the price??

Once again, they're eating humble-pie at the diner down the road from mommy's house.

post #33 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

Ship times improve to 3-4 weeks from 3 - 5 weeks.

That is more like rewording things rather then improvement.

No; it's reducing the high estimate by a week, which is an improvement.
“I wasted time, and now doth time waste me.”
Reply
“I wasted time, and now doth time waste me.”
Reply
post #34 of 39

Big deal as long as you get it and it works fine.

post #35 of 39
Most recent Mac revenue was $5.519b on units of 4.136m and driven by laptop sales.

Laptops have been above 75% and at that level it's around 3.1m laptops. The iMac would be around 750k going by Q1 2013 figures so that leaves 284k between the Mini and Pro. That's a bit low so the laptops might have dropped below 75% this quarter and/or iMacs could have dropped.

The Mac Pro isn't selling in huge volumes relatively because the revenue would be much higher if that was the case. However, if it had been selling 50k units/qtr in the past, they may have designed the supply chain for that amount. The problem with such low volumes is you can't fill retail channels like you can with laptops so peak demand would cause a backlog.

The entire workstation market is ~900k units per quarter and the asp is down at ~$1500 so for Apple to take ~15% of the market (100-150k units) with a minimum price of $3k is good enough and it's what they always do - go after the premium portion of the market.

As for dual processors, it doesn't help all that much. Intel has quite a high price on the 12-core chip so dual 8-core would offer better performance per dollar but it's not that big of a deal and it helps cut Apple's inventory as they can use a single motherboard. They are competitive in price with the companies they compete with at this level.

Haswell-EP goes to 14-core and Broadwell 18-core:

http://vr-zone.com/articles/broadwell-ep-xeon-e5-v4-focus-cores-reliability-per-core-performance/66845.html

Haswell-EP is in the wild and supports DDR4:

http://wccftech.com/intel-haswellep-xeon-e5-2600-v3-sample-spotted-wild-sold-650-ebay-r3-motherboard/

They might use updated FirePros too:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7927/amd-launches-firepro-w9100

Now that Apple has the factory all setup and delivering units and they have an idea of how the orders are going, the next update should be much easier. If Intel targets Q3 2014, the next MP update can happen in September-November. It would be good if they had better SSD prices too.
post #36 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Most recent Mac revenue was $5.519b on units of 4.136m and driven by laptop sales.

Laptops have been above 75% and at that level it's around 3.1m laptops. The iMac would be around 750k going by Q1 2013 figures so that leaves 284k between the Mini and Pro. That's a bit low so the laptops might have dropped below 75% this quarter and/or iMacs could have dropped.

The Mac Pro isn't selling in huge volumes relatively because the revenue would be much higher if that was the case. However, if it had been selling 50k units/qtr in the past, they may have designed the supply chain for that amount. The problem with such low volumes is you can't fill retail channels like you can with laptops so peak demand would cause a backlog.

The entire workstation market is ~900k units per quarter and the asp is down at ~$1500 so for Apple to take ~15% of the market (100-150k units) with a minimum price of $3k is good enough and it's what they always do - go after the premium portion of the market.

As for dual processors, it doesn't help all that much. Intel has quite a high price on the 12-core chip so dual 8-core would offer better performance per dollar but it's not that big of a deal and it helps cut Apple's inventory as they can use a single motherboard. They are competitive in price with the companies they compete with at this level.

Haswell-EP goes to 14-core and Broadwell 18-core:

http://vr-zone.com/articles/broadwell-ep-xeon-e5-v4-focus-cores-reliability-per-core-performance/66845.html

Haswell-EP is in the wild and supports DDR4:

http://wccftech.com/intel-haswellep-xeon-e5-2600-v3-sample-spotted-wild-sold-650-ebay-r3-motherboard/

They might use updated FirePros too:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7927/amd-launches-firepro-w9100

Now that Apple has the factory all setup and delivering units and they have an idea of how the orders are going, the next update should be much easier. If Intel targets Q3 2014, the next MP update can happen in September-November. It would be good if they had better SSD prices too.

Thanks Marvin. I suppose I just have my old mentality from years and years of buying and using the dual CPU Mac Pro's. My current one is still serving me well so I will not be in the market for the new type Mac Pro for another year or two. I tend to buy the next to fastest one as this tends to give me the best bang for the buck since I hold on to them for so long. I don't game as much on my Mac Pro as I used to so video cards that can't be upgraded easily or cheaply like the older Mac Pro's might not be as big of a deal as it was in the past. All my gaming has now pretty much shifted to my PS4, iPad, and iPhone. 

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply
post #37 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by friedmud View Post

Oh - and if you think that no one uses these things I'm currently running a simulation that is using 30GB of RAM and is destroying all 12 cores.  If they would have made a 24-core Mac Pro I definitely would have bought that.

Oh - and I have done the pricing on dual 12-core Linux workstations.  To get one similarly configured from a reputable builder (like Boxx) it's about $12k to $13k.  Now - that's not THAT far above the ~$8k I pay for the Mac Workstations... but it's not for free either.

I did price out a "build my own" and I could build a dual 12-core system myself with good parts for about $9k to $10k (yes, you can do it cheaper if you cheap out on a few components - but when we're talking about a machine that I rely on for work I would never try to shave $1k off to get inferior parts).

Ultimately, being able to use OSX and have all the Thunderbolt goodness... and being able to jack in multiple 4k monitors (and have them actually work out of the box) swayed me to go Mac again...

In a few years I'll do that math again and see where I end up....

Great story! What are you modeling, if you don't mind me asking?
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #38 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Great story! What are you modeling, if you don't mind me asking?

Any answer that doesn't include the words Kate Upton will make me very disappointed.


(Possibly not safe for work)

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #39 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


Great story! What are you modeling, if you don't mind me asking?

 

Scientific and engineering multiphysics simulations that are mainly centered around energy generation (like nuclear, geothermal, wind, etc.).  You can see our software here: http://mooseframework.org

 

There are a few movies on there at the bottom of the page that explain some of what the software can do (I'm the one doing the voice overs on the video)... and it's all free and open source so if you're interested in that sort of thing give it a try ;-)

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple's Mac Pro ship times improve to 3-4 weeks