or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Intel unleashes Mac-bound "Woodcrest" server chip
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Intel unleashes Mac-bound "Woodcrest" server chip - Page 10

post #361 of 566
Yeah, with 10.5 coming out, drivers for scanners, printers and miscellaneous stuff is rare enough as it is, Leopard and Universal has put pressure on a lot of Mac software developers and hardware/ accessory makers. 10.5 better have some really good out-of-the-box support for tons of video and still digital cameras
post #362 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by BradMacPro
Sorry, I didn't know your situation. Yes, Apple has changed the printing APIs, and more than once, which has fustrated many a printer driver writer. They also tripped up scanner drivers too when 10.3 came out. The pace at which Apple released major OS upgrades also made several companies give up on the Mac. Such is life. I keep seeing this online banner ad for TypeStyler, which was a cool type effects program for OS 9. Never made it to OS X, but the ad has been saying for about two years that a OS X version is on it's way. In about 2 weeks, there won't be any Macs that can run Classic anymore. That's assuming Apple drops the PM G5. "Progress is our greatest stumbling block"

Makes you wonder how a company can put out full OS upgrades every year in addition to a very large library of pro software and 'digital-lifestyle' software and other companies can't even update one little app.
post #363 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Makes you wonder how a company can put out full OS upgrades every year in addition to a very large library of pro software and 'digital-lifestyle' software and other companies can't even update one little app.

Dingdingding!

Indeed.

The "oh, but Apple keeps changing the APIs! That means more work for us!" is a bullshit excuse.
post #364 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Makes you wonder how a company can put out full OS upgrades every year in addition to a very large library of pro software and 'digital-lifestyle' software and other companies can't even update one little app.

Apple has a lot of software developers, paid by iPod sales. 1/2 of Apple's income is from iPod sales. Anyway, assuming Leopard doesn't change printing and scanning, Tiger already ships with a ton of universal printer drivers and a universal epson scanner driver, but I don't know which models that covers.
The MACaholic
Reply
The MACaholic
Reply
post #365 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by Chucker
The "oh, but Apple keeps changing the APIs! That means more work for us!" is a bullshit excuse.

Indeed it is and it's not helped by some of the same manufacturers hanging on to ancient APIs that Apple have all along said were going to be deprecated. On the other side of the coin, Apple hadn't finalised replacement APIs up until 10.3 in many cases and even then, they don't offer all the features of the old API.

I've an Epson scanner with a horrible driver that hasn't been really updated since OS8. I know when I'm using it because the fans come on and my computer grinds to a crawl. Presumably all the right APIs are in place now though as Apple's own Image Capture application works fine with it and doesn't suck the computer into a black hole during use.

The problem seems to be that these companies expect driver models to change once every decade as happens with Windows, not every couple of years as Apple have done. Constant transitions and development are beyond what they're willing to spend.
post #366 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
It's easy for you guys who never use equipment that requires these interfaces, because you really don't know much about it. You just deal with the computer as is, and some do some programming work for stuff in the computer industry itself, but not these sophisticated pieces of biomedical equipment and such. If you did, you'd know.

And that big expensive sophisticated kit can't be accessed with a $179 serial card?

Point I'm making, I'm sure there's still a need for serial comms in some situations but they're becoming more and more niche and specialist to the point where you could probably charge ridiculous amounts like $179 for a serial card and it's still a tiny fraction of the cost of a system.

This morning, I bought a printer driver for £150. Twice the cost of the whole stinkin OS. The client didn't bat an eyelid as it saves them thousands over the year to use Macs still.
post #367 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by BradMacPro
Apple has a lot of software developers, paid by iPod sales.

Writing a printer driver doesn't take more than a few developers, if even that. Not much rocket science to it.
post #368 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
The problem seems to be that these companies expect driver models to change once every decade as happens with Windows, not every couple of years as Apple have done. Constant transitions and development are beyond what they're willing to spend.

Unfortunately, though, it's not their loss, but the customers' loss and Apple's loss. So it's really an unfair decision of theirs.
post #369 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by BradMacPro
Sorry, I didn't know your situation. Yes, Apple has changed the printing APIs, and more than once, which has fustrated many a printer driver writer. They also tripped up scanner drivers too when 10.3 came out. The pace at which Apple released major OS upgrades also made several companies give up on the Mac. Such is life. I keep seeing this online banner ad for TypeStyler, which was a cool type effects program for OS 9. Never made it to OS X, but the ad has been saying for about two years that a OS X version is on it's way. In about 2 weeks, there won't be any Macs that can run Classic anymore. That's assuming Apple drops the PM G5. "Progress is our greatest stumbling block"

By the way, I just noticed, on reading your post that I referred to 10.5. Sorry, I meant to write, 10.4.5 and up. But, I wonder what will be done in 10.5 about these issues, as I know that I'm, by far, not the only one unhappy.
post #370 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by Chucker
Dingdingding!

Indeed.

The "oh, but Apple keeps changing the APIs! That means more work for us!" is a bullshit excuse.

no, it's not. When the API's are removed, it makes interfacing very difficult. Then companies have to do work that may not be compatable in the next OS release, or even the next update. This is a serious problem.
post #371 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
no, it's not. When the API's are removed, it makes interfacing very difficult. Then companies have to do work that may not be compatable in the next OS release, or even the next update. This is a serious problem.

You are vastly overestimating the amount of work it takes to write a printer driver.
post #372 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
And that big expensive sophisticated kit can't be accessed with a $179 serial card?

Point I'm making, I'm sure there's still a need for serial comms in some situations but they're becoming more and more niche and specialist to the point where you could probably charge ridiculous amounts like $179 for a serial card and it's still a tiny fraction of the cost of a system.

This morning, I bought a printer driver for £150. Twice the cost of the whole stinkin OS. The client didn't bat an eyelid as it saves them thousands over the year to use Macs still.

No, they can't be, because there aren't the appropriate cards available.

If the cards were there, the problem wouldn't exist, and we wouldn't be talking about it now! I had Wolf cards with four and eight serial port cables. None of these work with OS X, because the manufacturer told me that Apple removed the required software, and the development work was simply too much expense. They still have their Windows product lines.

It really is NOT too much to ask Apple to support these standards. This is one reason why they are not taken more seriously in business. They are too arbitrary in what they will support.

It's also one of the reasons why many of their own technologies have died out. It's one of the reasons why firewire is dying out.

In a year or two, when all external HD's, DVR, etc are using either SATA ot USB 2, will people here be crying out for Apple to drop legacy support for Firewire, as only camcorders, and a few other items are the only ones using it?
post #373 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by Chucker
You are vastly overestimating the amount of work it takes to write a printer driver.

No, I'm not. It's not JUST a printer driver. you should know that. I'm sure that Fuji, and others, have more expertise than any programmers here do. If they can find that it takes over a year to get around the limitations of the crippled software that Apple put out, I doubt that you would do any better.

This is nothing against you, or any others on this board who might do this work, but it's no nearly as simple as you would want us to think. If support for something is not in the OS, then is can be very difficult for a third part to add it. And when that lack of support itself changes over time, that makes it even more difficult.
post #374 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
No, I'm not. It's not JUST a printer driver. you should know that.

The part that relies on Apple's APIs, however, IS JUST a printer driver. The surrounding software is essentially RAD, and thanks to Carbon works across Mac OS 8 and Mac OS X 10.4.

Quote:
This is nothing against you, or any others on this board who might do this work, but it's no nearly as simple as you would want us to think.[

What do you base that belief on?
post #375 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
If the cards were there, the problem wouldn't exist, and we wouldn't be talking about it now! I had Wolf cards with four and eight serial port cables. None of these work with OS X, because the manufacturer told me that Apple removed the required software, and the development work was simply too much expense. They still have their Windows product lines.

Does the XServe's serial port support anything other than console management?
post #376 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
No, they can't be, because there aren't the appropriate cards available.

So this ...

http://www.keyspan.com/products/sxpr....2.compat.spml

... is no good ?
post #377 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by JeffDM
Does the XServe's serial port support anything other than console management?

Serial port is sometime also used in servers by UPS products. But these days they work with USB as well.
post #378 of 566
Do note that Power Macs no longer come with PCI slots. (PCI Express is not compatible.)

However, they sell various USB equivalents.

Ridiculous pricing if you ask me, but, hey, if it works
post #379 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by Chucker
The part that relies on Apple's APIs, however, IS JUST a printer driver. The surrounding software is essentially RAD, and thanks to Carbon works across Mac OS 8 and Mac OS X 10.4.



What do you base that belief on?

The fact, that when I had my company, and all of the machines that used these interfaces began failing at the same time, and the companies, at first, had no idea as to why, but when they did research into what was happening, they all came up with the same conclusions, that Apple removed support for some required technologies from the OS.

At first, most had hopes that it wouldn't take long for them to fix the problems, but then they were reporting that the problems were more serious than believed. This was well known in the commercial photographic industry, and was reported in the industry publications. Manufacturers sent out letters enumerating the problems, and recommended that we revert to 10.2, which we, and others did, to run the machines until they could come up with solutions. some of those solutions never appeared.

SCSI, for example, is desirable for certain graphics arts printers because of the speed, and control, SCSI gives. Ethernet just isn't in the same league. I have had printers that used both, and the ethernet solution was much slower, even when they went to 1GHz connections. firewire was no better for this purpose.

Sometimes, the newer tech is NOT better than the old. I know that it was expected that 1.6GHz firewire would finally take over, but it has not appeared.
post #380 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by JeffDM
Does the XServe's serial port support anything other than console management?

I'm not too familiar with the XServe.
post #381 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
So this ...

http://www.keyspan.com/products/sxpr....2.compat.spml

... is no good ?

It's possible. This is pretty new. The older model had problems with 232 standards. It also depends on what speeds it operates at. Many boards that existed before, weren't fast enough for equipment that needed speeds up to 1Mbs.
post #382 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by backtomac
Kentsfield isn't available now is it? Isn't it coming to market at the end of this year?

Nope and probably December. Intel will have to ship Kentsfield to Apple 2 to 3 months early, assuming Apple announces "Mac Pros" at WWDC + 1 month ship date.

Kentsfield isn't really that difficult to do. It's just 2 Conroes in the same package sharing the same FSB. The hard thing is shipping 2.66 and 2.93 GHz Kentsfields with reasonable TDP. They can do it with a 100 Watt envelope, which will represent a return to 1S Prescott Wattage levels, but not sure people would want to go back to those days.
post #383 of 566
[QUOTE]Originally posted by melgross
In a year or two, when all external HD's, DVR, etc are using either SATA ot USB 2, will people here be crying out for Apple to drop legacy support for Firewire, as only camcorders, and a few other items are the only ones using it?



Hmm.. Scarily, external SATA is gaining big traction in PC land. USB 2.0 is pretty much de facto now. One camcorders drop Firewire (Which remember Sony was also advocating as much as Apple at one time) FW400 will really be in the shitter.

Does external SATA provide power over the bus connection? Not with current eSata external hard disks I think... Not as convenient as back in 2002 when Lacie had this simple, small 20GB drives with FW400 connections. They were great "pocket drives", fast, big enough capacity in a nice form factor, and powered by the FW400 bus. 5400rpm laptop drives in them, no doubt, but they really were quite decent at the time... and when Lacie had much higher quality control, IMO.

USB 2.0 can bus-power 2.5" drives, I am not sure about 3.5"drives. Same with eSATA, not sure about bus powered 3.5" drives. Hmm.......... Whatever it is, lugging around an external power brick for your external drive is a huge pain in the ass. Again I ask, is eSATA supposed to solve this problem?
post #384 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross

In a year or two, when all external HD's, DVR, etc are using either SATA ot USB 2, will people here be crying out for Apple to drop legacy support for Firewire, as only camcorders, and a few other items are the only ones using it?

For video editing, Firewire can't be easily replaced by USB 2.0. When video editing, not only are you pulling in video and time codes, you're also sending out controls like play/pause/go here/etc... This requires at least two simultaneous streams, each going in different directions.

USB stands for Universal SERIAL Bus. Meaning, it would have to stop sending video a couple times a second to see if it had any incoming data.

In other words, sloppy response times (although that has never been a strength of the MiniDV decks I've used) and dropped frames.

I would be very suprised if it happened.
post #385 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
It's easy for you guys who never use equipment that requires these interfaces, because you really don't know much about it. You just deal with the computer as is, and some do some programming work for stuff in the computer industry itself, but not these sophisticated pieces of biomedical equipment and such. If you did, you'd know.

Survey equipment is number one in my book to give an example of modern day technology that still uses old school serial. Serial in terms of old school means easier on the batteries.
Hard-Core.
Reply
Hard-Core.
Reply
post #386 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by gregmightdothat
For video editing, Firewire can't be easily replaced by USB 2.0. When video editing, not only are you pulling in video and time codes, you're also sending out controls like play/pause/go here/etc... This requires at least two simultaneous streams, each going in different directions.

Isn't that for transferring from tape? Much of the industry is moving away from that, where you'd just copy files from a drive.
post #387 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by THT
Nope and probably December. Intel will have to ship Kentsfield to Apple 2 to 3 months early, assuming Apple announces "Mac Pros" at WWDC + 1 month ship date.

Kentsfield isn't really that difficult to do. It's just 2 Conroes in the same package sharing the same FSB. The hard thing is shipping 2.66 and 2.93 GHz Kentsfields with reasonable TDP. They can do it with a 100 Watt envelope, which will represent a return to 1S Prescott Wattage levels, but not sure people would want to go back to those days.

According to this article, Cloverton will hit 2.67GHz and 110W at launch, I believe it will be the same for Kentsfield. It's hot but not to much given that "current" quad-core systems will be at least at 130W (2x65W). It's true that for Kentsfield the four cores will share a single FSB, so I don't know how much improvements in performance it will be compared to a 3.20GHz dual-core Conroe (that will also be available at the end of the year) and to a "regular" dual dual-core woodcrest at 2.67GHz that will have 2 FSB at 1333MHz (vs. 1066MHz)...
All I can see about this move from Intel is to bring "lower cost" quad-core and 8-cores systems to the market sooner, knowing that these CPUs will be pin-compatible with Conroe and Woodcrest respectively.
I don't think Apple will be able to use these new chips before 2007, my guess: announced at MacWorld, available in february...
By the way, I think that Woodcrest-based Macs will be announced AND shipping at the WWDC.
post #388 of 566
[QUOTE]Originally posted by mjteix
.....By the way, I think that Woodcrest-based Macs will be announced AND shipping at the WWDC.



YEAH!!! BRING IT ON!! ARHGHGHGHHGH the wait is killing me. Luckily though I will be going to Australia this Saturday night for a 6-month stint. So the packing and unpacking and the plane trip will kill a few days of waiting for WWDC. By the time I'm set up in OZ with a laptop and broadband and stuff, it would be say just 5 days to go to WWDC..... Yes, free of Malaysistan and back to OZ-land for a while. To misquote a line from Sixth Sense, "I miss seeing white people everywhere"
post #389 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by ZachPruckowski
A Quad-2.0 system doesn't compete with Conroes.

Oh, it does. The only people buying 2S 2 GHz Woodcrest machines over a 2.66 GHz Conroe are buying it for specific applications, ones that take very good advantage of the cores or ones that may need 16+ GB memory. I don't think Apple's market fits this bill, and Conroe machines will present much better price/performance.

I definitely think that in Apple minds, they are thinking, "Why Bother?" when Conroe delivers on average the same performance for better margin.

Quote:
Another reason Apple may want an all Quad line-up is that it makes a nice delineator - a 2.67 GHz Mac Pro isn't that much ahead of a 2.4 GHz Conroe iMac. An all-quad pro line-up makes it clear that these are the workstations, especially if coupled with a "Mac" desktop.

Best on the last 5 years, I don't think Apple will have no problem selling a 2.4 GHz Conroe iMac at $1800 whil selling a $2000 2.67 Conroe "Mac Pro". They'll just pump the features up: better graphics, more memory capacity, better optical, better hard drive, expansion capability.
post #390 of 566
THT - what I meant was that the Power Mac sort of fills two spots in the Apple line-up: high-end desktop and workstation.

I think Apple will make the Mac Pro the workstation - and thus all Quad, while either introducing something in the $1400-1800 range to cover the high-end desktop part.

A 2.67 GHz Conroe at $2000 competes with an XPS (probably poorly)

A Quad-2.0 at $2000 competes with a $3000 Dell Precision workstation. That puts the hurt on Dell.
post #391 of 566
Apple has got to have a 4-core system. Conroe: max 2-cores (1 socket). Woodcrest: 4 cores with 2 sockets. IMHO, Apple will want to have a "Quad" to market on the high end. I know, this sentiment has been repeated here very often \ 8)
post #392 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by sunilraman
Apple has got to have a 4-core system. Conroe: max 2-cores (1 socket). Woodcrest: 4 cores with 2 sockets. IMHO, Apple will want to have a "Quad" to market on the high end. I know, this sentiment has been repeated here very often \ 8)

Yeah - I think it's pretty much assumed that Apple will release at least one Quad. The major issue is whether they will release one Quad, two Quads, or three.
post #393 of 566
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by ZachPruckowski
THT - what I meant was that the Power Mac sort of fills two spots in the Apple line-up: high-end desktop and workstation.

I think Apple will make the Mac Pro the workstation - and thus all Quad, while either introducing something in the $1400-1800 range to cover the high-end desktop part.

A 2.67 GHz Conroe at $2000 competes with an XPS (probably poorly)

A Quad-2.0 at $2000 competes with a $3000 Dell Precision workstation. That puts the hurt on Dell.

That's a pretty good sounding idea, but it gets too close to iMac pricing, and they have always frowned on mixing markets. Apple is a shit or get off the pot computer manufacturer. Thus far. Things change, but we'll have to see in 11days! Wow that's close!
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
post #394 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by gregmightdothat
For video editing, Firewire can't be easily replaced by USB 2.0. When video editing, not only are you pulling in video and time codes, you're also sending out controls like play/pause/go here/etc... This requires at least two simultaneous streams, each going in different directions.

USB stands for Universal SERIAL Bus. Meaning, it would have to stop sending video a couple times a second to see if it had any incoming data.

In other words, sloppy response times (although that has never been a strength of the MiniDV decks I've used) and dropped frames.

I would be very suprised if it happened.

Yeah, we know about USB 2.

There are other technologies that are more professional that replace it quite handily. firewire is a poor brother when dealing with uncompressed hi def formats. It also doesn't work for some pro uses because the standard doesn't have needed info passed up the bus.
post #395 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by onlooker
That's a pretty good sounding idea, but it gets too close to iMac pricing, and they have always frowned on mixing markets.

In the UK, an iMac 20" is £1129. The current low end PowerMac 2.0 Dual is £1399. Pretty close. Back when they did the 1.8Ghz single CPU PowerMac it was even closer.

Of course, you don't get the monitor with the PowerMac so the iMac is a better deal if it's all you need anyway and you're not the sort that has to add serial cards.
post #396 of 566
I think it might be nice to see a small footprint mini-tower, like the size of the Performa 6400, for a low end dual, Conroe based, maybe extreme edition. And then a woodcrest based quad for the real power users. The G5 case doesn't fit on a 24" wide table. Anybody want the desktop configuration like the Power Mac 7500-G3 had?
The MACaholic
Reply
The MACaholic
Reply
post #397 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by gregmightdothat
USB stands for Universal SERIAL Bus. Meaning, it would have to stop sending video a couple times a second to see if it had any incoming data.

Firewire is serial too...what's your answer to *that*?
post #398 of 566
You folks might want to follow this link:
http://computer.howstuffworks.com/usb1.htm

USB supports isochronous data transfers like FireWire does.

Like RS-232, the original serial port standard never used on Macs, it supports an interrupt mode to start and stop the flow of data.

Of course USB supports up to 127 logical devices, where the old serial port only dealt with one. Of course there is also the hot swap advantage. There is also the advantage of only needing 4 conductors and the small connector.
The MACaholic
Reply
The MACaholic
Reply
post #399 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Firewire is serial too...what's your answer to *that*?

Um, I don't have an answer to that. My whole video world just crashed down. All 1 and 2/3 classes of it.
post #400 of 566
Quote:
Originally posted by BradMacPro
USB supports isochronous data transfers like FireWire does.

That is not quite true, or, true, but not good enough. Those that read the spec know that USB Isochronous transfer assures data timing but does not assure data integrity, which is why the article you quoted states there is no error correction.

edit: never mind, an industrial developer told me this, I thought I saw confirmation elsewhere some time ago, but I can't find backup and a few pages that say there's now Firewire error correction, so it's probably not true.

However, if, as megross says, USB doesn't have a standardized VTR hardware control or timecode transmission, then it's not sufficient for DV or HDV use.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Intel unleashes Mac-bound "Woodcrest" server chip