or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple finally rolls out 8-core Mac Pro
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple finally rolls out 8-core Mac Pro - Page 4

post #121 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slewis View Post

I define efficient as having an equal number of cores, but fewer chips, and just as much processing power.

It's not as simple as that. Two separate dual core is better than a single dual-dual in some cases because each socket has its own independent bus, offering a lot less opportunities for contention, four cores per FSB, or two cores per FSB. The difference isn't earth shattering, but for many uses, there is a difference.

Other makers allow you to spec out their workstations with only one chip though, so you could just buy one dual-dual core chip and leave the other socket unused, and you can populate the second socket at some other time. One problem with that is that the price of some competing workstations is such that you can get both sockets populated in the Mac Pro for the same price for similar spec chips, just fewer chip choices.

There's probably not much difference in power efficiency because the dies are mostly the same difference, a quad core Clovertown has two Woodcrests stitched together into the same package rather than one each in two separate packages.
post #122 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

It's not as simple as that. Two separate dual core is better than a single dual-dual in some cases because each socket has its own independent bus, offering a lot less opportunities for contention, four cores per FSB, or two cores per FSB. The difference isn't earth shattering, but for many uses, there is a difference.

Other makers allow you to spec out their workstations with only one chip though, so you could just buy one dual-dual core chip and leave the other socket unused, and you can populate the second socket at some other time. One problem with that is that the price of some competing workstations is such that you can get both sockets populated in the Mac Pro for the same price for similar spec chips, just fewer chip choices.

There's probably not much difference in power efficiency because the dies are mostly the same difference, a quad core Clovertown has two Woodcrests stitched together into the same package rather than one each in two separate packages.

Sadly you have a point, until it comes time to divvy up the RAM. Then those Dual Dual Cores seem to be a little less flexible then that.

Further, the only reason there is a second Front Side Bus is because there is another chip. Considering it's the Front Side Buses job to transfer information between the CPU and other pieces of the motherboard, that's irrelevant because the only thing those 2 Front Side Buses are doing is transfering information between 2 different chips and the rest of the Motherboard, and that means those 2 Front Side Buses probably have to transfer information between those 2 CPUs meaning less is being communicated between the CPUs, and the rest of the board.

I think I like the idea of Fewer Chips and more flexibility between the chips that are there.

Sebastian
Þ & þ are called "Thorn" & þey represent þe sound you've associated "th" wiþ since þe 13þ or 14þ century. I'm bringing it back.
<(=_=)> (>=_=)> <(=_=<) ^(=_=^) (^=_=)^ ^(=_=)^ +(=_=)+
Reply
Þ & þ are called "Thorn" & þey represent þe sound you've associated "th" wiþ since þe 13þ or 14þ century. I'm bringing it back.
<(=_=)> (>=_=)> <(=_=<) ^(=_=^) (^=_=)^ ^(=_=)^ +(=_=)+
Reply
post #123 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slewis View Post

Sadly you have a point, until it comes time to divvy up the RAM. Then those Dual Dual Cores seem to be a little less flexible then that.

Further, the only reason there is a second Front Side Bus is because there is another chip. Considering it's the Front Side Buses job to transfer information between the CPU and other pieces of the motherboard, that's irrelevant because the only thing those 2 Front Side Buses are doing is transfering information between 2 different chips and the rest of the Motherboard, and that means those 2 Front Side Buses probably have to transfer information between those 2 CPUs meaning less is being communicated between the CPUs, and the rest of the board.

There's more to it than the memory though. The memory system can be a little faster than the FSB, and then there's still the other IO, like the drives and video, I think there's still a speed advantage to having it be two separate chips. I don't think the CPUs need to communicate with each other that much.
post #124 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddha View Post

Actually...

10.2 - Jaguar
10.3 - Panther
10.4 - Tiger
10.5 - Leopard

Panther was after Jaguar, easy mistake .

He was being sarcastic.
"Humankind -- despite its artistic pretensions, its sophistication, and its many accomplishments -- owes its existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains."
Reply
"Humankind -- despite its artistic pretensions, its sophistication, and its many accomplishments -- owes its existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains."
Reply
post #125 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by theapplegenius View Post

He was being sarcastic.

But we don't know that cause he didn't use tildes (~)

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #126 of 165
I was hopeing for 32gb or ram, i know its completly not practicle or needed. Most other computers max out ram at something like 4gb at higher speeds so to have 16gb or ram is rather crazy and to have 32 gb of ram would be unbeleiveable.

The only resonable thing i wanted was a 5600 in there. Everyone esle seems to want a 8800 but so what, it is not the fastest card for 3d aplications and if your a gammer, you probably dont use a mac. I do think the ATI 2800 would be nice, i dont even think its out yet, since it is more powerful than the 8800 and maybe would lure some gamers to buy a mac even if they run windows.
post #127 of 165
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Hows that?
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 #128 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpiddly View Post

I was hopeing for 32gb or ram, i know its completly not practicle or needed. Most other computers max out ram at something like 4gb at higher speeds so to have 16gb or ram is rather crazy and to have 32 gb of ram would be unbeleiveable.

The only resonable thing i wanted was a 5600 in there. Everyone esle seems to want a 8800 but so what, it is not the fastest card for 3d aplications and if your a gammer, you probably dont use a mac. I do think the ATI 2800 would be nice, i dont even think its out yet, since it is more powerful than the 8800 and maybe would lure some gamers to buy a mac even if they run windows.

I want to see the Nvidia 128 core card in there. If it's price isn't totally rediculous I'm getting it. If not the 5600 will have to do.
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 #129 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Hows that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647 View Post

But we don't know that cause he didn't use tildes (~)

"Humankind -- despite its artistic pretensions, its sophistication, and its many accomplishments -- owes its existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains."
Reply
"Humankind -- despite its artistic pretensions, its sophistication, and its many accomplishments -- owes its existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains."
Reply
post #130 of 165
So here goes... I just ordered an Asus P5W Deluxe motherboard for my hackintosh.... Gonna team that up with a e6700. I have been frequenting the insanelymac.com forums today. You wouldn't believe how many of those guys have gone that route because apple won't. For all of those nay sayers that a prosumer mac wouldn't sell. There are hundreds of these guys who went through the pain and suffering of building their own because apple doesn't offer such a computer. People say that this prosumer mac would cannibalize iMac sales... apple isn't even selling computers to these guys. I'm jumping on board with them. I'm tired of waiting on apple to make a reasonable computer for my needs.

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #131 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Well, so much for the "Apple Tuesdays".

The combo "Tuesday+Wednesday" is the new Apple Tuesday.
post #132 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647 View Post

So here goes... I just ordered an Asus P5W Deluxe motherboard for my hackintosh.... Gonna team that up with a e6700. I have been frequenting the insanelymac.com forums today. You wouldn't believe how many of those guys have gone that route because apple won't. For all of those nay sayers that a prosumer mac wouldn't sell. There are hundreds of these guys who went through the pain and suffering of building their own because apple doesn't offer such a computer. People say that this prosumer mac would cannibalize iMac sales... apple isn't even selling computers to these guys. I'm jumping on board with them. I'm tired of waiting on apple to make a reasonable computer for my needs.

As you say-"hundreds". Hundreds do not make a market. Hundreds of thousands begin to.

While I would like to see one myself, Apple must think there is a good reason for not having one.

Compared to most folks, you guys aren't reasonable. You're driven. There isn't anything wrong with that, but most people don't care enough.
post #133 of 165
I have to agree with emig647

I think the market for xMac is larger than we think. The options simply aren't good.


Low end -

Mac mini- integrated graphics, small and cute but capable. Dual monitor challenged.

Midrange-

iMac. Nice integration, discrete graphics, dual mon capable, not upgradable

High end-

Mac Pro- extendable, powerful, expensive,


Apple simply has nothing for a computer enthusiast that fits. I love the iMac and I'd love to own one but it's a laptop on a stick. I'm a bit frustrated that it's abundantly clear that the GPU is taking on an increasingly important role in processing once Leopard hits. Where is Apple weak? The GPU ....the irony.

Why not give us an option that hovers in the $1000 to 1500 range that at least gives us the ability to upgrade the GPU since they aren't just about games anymore.

Apple consumers have made the company healthy and wealthy. Throw us a freakin bone here.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #134 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

I have to agree with emig647

I think the market for xMac is larger than we think. The options simply aren't good.
...
Apple simply has nothing for a computer enthusiast that fits.

This is a gory market in which Apple is very reluctant to compete. The Cube experience left such a sore taste. \

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

I'm a bit frustrated that it's abundantly clear that the GPU is taking on an increasingly important role in processing once Leopard hits. Where is Apple weak? The GPU ....the irony.

The next integrated graphics generation is supposed to be much better that the current one. Not to the level of other solutions, but we will see.
post #135 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by PB View Post

This is a gory market in which Apple is very reluctant to compete. The Cube experience left such a sore taste. \


The next integrated graphics generation is supposed to be much better that the current one. Not to the level of other solutions, but we will see.

The proposed Intel price cuts in April and July on Conroe and Woodcrest are a perfect opportunity to create an extensible Mac at $1499 tops. A 2.66Ghz Conroe chip will be $180. Hell you can ship the base unit with X3000 graphics if you want and let others BTO or add the GPU they need later but dammit man give me a chance build a capable Mac system that doesn't cost me my firstborn.

The iMacs will continue to sell. Many people like the built in screen and easy setup. What I'd love to see is a simple squat box with one optical drive, 4 dimm sockets, 2 drive bays and a 16x and 4x PCI Express bus. Should be easy to accomplish.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #136 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by theapplegenius View Post

He was being sarcastic.

Clearly not considering he used that piece of information inside of another joke.. it screwed up the joke because he did that. If it was sarcasm he's obviously not accustomed to humor.
post #137 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post

Great new addition.

Important info missing for those who just don't appreciaate the chicken and egg adage.

"The 8-core Mac Pro gives pro software developers a platform to prepare new versions of their applications for the future, when 8-core technology is more prevalent on the desktop," an Apple spokesperson told Macworld.

post #138 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

The proposed Intel price cuts in April and July on Conroe and Woodcrest are a perfect opportunity to create an extensible Mac at $1499 tops. A 2.66Ghz Conroe chip will be $180. Hell you can ship the base unit with X3000 graphics if you want and let others BTO or add the GPU they need later but dammit man give me a chance build a capable Mac system that doesn't cost me my firstborn.

The iMacs will continue to sell. Many people like the built in screen and easy setup. What I'd love to see is a simple squat box with one optical drive, 4 dimm sockets, 2 drive bays and a 16x and 4x PCI Express bus. Should be easy to accomplish.

It's been a perfect opportunity for years, or so we like to think, but Apple doesn't agree.

When the G5 tower first came out, some here might remember, I proposed an idea for a $999 model, that even my friends in Apple engineering thought was a good one, but told me would never happen.

So far, they've been right.
post #139 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddha View Post

Clearly not considering he used that piece of information inside of another joke.. it screwed up the joke because he did that. If it was sarcasm he's obviously not accustomed to humor.

Seeing as you were the one that thought he was ferrealz, and everyone else got the joke, maybe it's *your* sarcasm...dar that needs to be re-tuned.
"Humankind -- despite its artistic pretensions, its sophistication, and its many accomplishments -- owes its existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains."
Reply
"Humankind -- despite its artistic pretensions, its sophistication, and its many accomplishments -- owes its existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains."
Reply
post #140 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by theapplegenius View Post

Seeing as you were the one that thought he was ferrealz, and everyone else got the joke, maybe it's *your* sarcasm...dar that needs to be re-tuned.

Lose the ego sir, I'm sure you can tell when everyone else thought it was a joke especially when nobody even commented on it.Keep replying to prove how ignorant and egocentric you are.
post #141 of 165
Let's keep the thread on topic here gentlemen.
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 #142 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647 View Post

So here goes... I just ordered an Asus P5W Deluxe motherboard for my hackintosh.... Gonna team that up with a e6700. I have been frequenting the insanelymac.com forums today. You wouldn't believe how many of those guys have gone that route because apple won't. For all of those nay sayers that a prosumer mac wouldn't sell. There are hundreds of these guys who went through the pain and suffering of building their own because apple doesn't offer such a computer. People say that this prosumer mac would cannibalize iMac sales... apple isn't even selling computers to these guys. I'm jumping on board with them. I'm tired of waiting on apple to make a reasonable computer for my needs.

So what are you going to do when Leopard comes out? Use Vista?

You really think Apple is going to allow that OS to run on a PC?

If it were likely that the Mac OS was going to on a PC after leopard comes out it would be much bigger news. Apple has already stated that Leopard wouldn't run on a regular X86 PC.
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 #143 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post

So what are you going to do when Leopard comes out? Use Vista?

You really think Apple is going to allow that OS to run on a PC?

If it were likely that the Mac OS was going to on a PC after leopard comes out it would be much bigger news. Apple has already stated that Leopard wouldn't run on a regular X86 PC.

It might work in the sort of crippled way it does on other PC's that it's been hacked into.

It's really more of a hobbyists machine than a practical one.
post #144 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by samurai1999 View Post

Intel hasn't announced the Xeon 3.0 Ghz Quad Core yet.
- but apparently it takes 150W

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38724

Intel isn't announcing this 3 GHz Xeon because the current one used by Apple is 150W, essentially an overclocked product that exceeds the pre-defined 120W for Clovertown. They'll release a proper 120W 3 GHz Clovertown later this year.
post #145 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPack View Post

Intel isn't announcing this 3 GHz Xeon because the current one used by Apple is 150W, essentially an overclocked product that exceeds the pre-defined 120W for Clovertown. They'll release a proper 120W 3 GHz Clovertown later this year.

And I would imagine that Apple will quietly switch to it.
post #146 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

It might work in the sort of crippled way it does on other PC's that it's been hacked into.

It's really more of a hobbyists machine than a practical one.

Personally I think there guy's are wasting money b/c it's not going to work at all. Apple is very committed to make sure it wont. They know everything these guy's are doing so obviously that way isn't going to work.
Isn't the OS version they are using now just a developers hack that was done by Apple on purpose to run on x86?
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 #147 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post

Personally I think there guy's are wasting money b/c it's not going to work at all. Apple is very committed to make sure it wont. They know everything these guy's are doing so obviously that way isn't going to work.
Isn't the OS version they are using now just a developers hack that was done by Apple on purpose to run on x86?

Here's the OSx86 Project website. It seems to be up to 10.4.8. I haven't been keeping track of it, so I don't know how well it runs, but I do know that it doesn't run much very well. There is a problem with drivers.

http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
post #148 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPack View Post

Intel isn't announcing this 3 GHz Xeon because the current one used by Apple is 150W, essentially an overclocked product that exceeds the pre-defined 120W for Clovertown. They'll release a proper 120W 3 GHz Clovertown later this year.

It seems that the processors are the Xeon X5365. Not sure if and how this fits what you say.
post #149 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Here's the OSx86 Project website. It seems to be up to 10.4.8. I haven't been keeping track of it, so I don't know how well it runs, but I do know that it doesn't run much very well. There is a problem with drivers.

http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

I have a mixed bag of success with these OS X builds. I've used the ones from JaS between 10.4.5 through 10.4.8 on a Dell Optiplex (Pentium 4 3.2GHz w/ SSE2 and SSE3). Sometimes everything works smoothly and sometimes it doesn't. There was plenty of BIOS and install option tinking to get it right, like not installing SSE3 and turnign off hyperthreading. Apps like iTunes often crashed and before build 10.4.8 I was unable to get the on-board NIC and the PCI NIC to work, though every other driver worked natively.

I mainly used it to showcase some of OS X's abilities to some techy, but non-Mac using friends as I had no network connection for it until recently. One of the things I liked was timing how long it took to start in Windows mode. About a minute, whch is pretty damn fast for a WIndows machine. Then timing it in OS X mode. This hacked version of OS X running on a Dell encrusted Pentium with 512MB RAM would start in 21 seconds. That is damn fast for any Mac. Not sure how they did that.

Overall, It's not bad to tinker with if you have an old x86 machine lying around. I defintiely learned quite a few things about the OS X environment.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #150 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

As you say-"hundreds". Hundreds do not make a market. Hundreds of thousands begin to.

While I would like to see one myself, Apple must think there is a good reason for not having one.

Compared to most folks, you guys aren't reasonable. You're driven. There isn't anything wrong with that, but most people don't care enough.

For everyone who's willing to hack, there's a hundred who say forget it and just go on using windows. You guys say there's not a market, but honestly, how big do you think the markets Apple competes in are? Premium thin and light, premium all in one, content creation workstation not what I'd call high volume markets.
post #151 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

YES! I expect a high end Mac Pro HD with BTO Blu-Ray and higher end graphics cards at NAB.

I expect this as well. Apple is going to have to get Blu-Ray into its products soon, and the Pro models would be the obvious first machines to embrace the new tech. The Mac Pro offers the added benefit of more internal space if the drives require more physical space.

I'm hoping that new GPU's are introduced for the Mac Pro at NAB. We know there are better cards out there so it's just a matter of time before they are included in the BTO list.

With the price drop on the current monitors, I'm hoping we'll see some LCD lit displays with the iSight built in. It would be amazing to see Apple impliment the patent they have of the cameras built right into the screen allowing eye contact on video chats.

I'm going to wait until NAB until I buy, hoping for updates, but this 8-Core machine will stand proudly on my desk regardless.
Fortes Fortuna Adiuvat
Reply
Fortes Fortuna Adiuvat
Reply
post #152 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

It's been a perfect opportunity for years, or so we like to think, but Apple doesn't agree.

When the G5 tower first came out, some here might remember, I proposed an idea for a $999 model, that even my friends in Apple engineering thought was a good one, but told me would never happen.

So far, they've been right.

So why is Apple so reluctant to do a Mac Headless Desktop?
- it seems loads of people would like one - for all the obvious reasons
- is it just that SteveJ doesn't want to do it, for some unfathomable aesthetic reason?
- it seems like an easy way for Apple to pick up some sales, which must be a good thing?
post #153 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by samurai1999 View Post

So why is Apple so reluctant to do a Mac Headless Desktop?
- it seems loads of people would like one - for all the obvious reasons
- is it just that SteveJ doesn't want to do it, for some unfathomable aesthetic reason?
- it seems like an easy way for Apple to pick up some sales, which must be a good thing?

Apple isn't all about Steve Jobs. All decisions are not solely his. They tried the headless Mac once and it failed miserably. Apple released the mini to attend to the lower half of that spectrum which was the greater half, and the mini is a success. Apple has beefed the iMac to attend to another part of the scope, and the iMac is a success. What is left is a very small percentage of users that can buy a low end Mac Pro if they need expandability. After that is a seriously slim amount of users. Apple does research, and obviously there is not a large enough amount of users that does not fall into a "what's left" category for them to reintroduce the cube or a similar set up.
Don't worry though. As the Mac user base grows the chances of another Mac grows as well. Once they feel the have a strong enough user base to build a midrange machine without taking too many sales away from competing products I'm sure they will come out with something else. Until then, that slim minority will have to make do with what is available.
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 #154 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post

They tried the headless Mac once and it failed miserably.

When was this?
post #155 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

When was this?

June 2000 June 2001
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #156 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

June 2000 — June 2001

I assume this is referring to the cube then, something I didn't pick up on before.

I have some problems with that. First is that it was so long ago, the market has changed since then, with people giving Macs a look because of OS X, and possibly a little bit of the halo effect. Tiger was about when the Mac platform was finally coming out of a slump. It also was not a tower. Another is that the cube was expensive, not having much price differentiation from the workstation model and being anemic in comparison. It was basically a machine designed for form at the expense of function. I'm with onlooker in one way, but I think that the Mac market is now ripe for a consumer tower - something for the power user that's not a pro. Both the mini and the cube showed a problem in how Apple understands market demands, they were technically headless computers, but Apple almost intentionally misunderstood the request.

Even if the market for that type of machine is somewhat small, I think its effects are greater than just for the sales of that machine. I think it was the hobbyist power user that influenced the computer purchases of their friends and family when the personal computer was becoming mainstream. If Apple can win them over, then it's going to be easier to get as many as a dozen other sales per system, by the people that trust that person.
post #157 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

June 2000 June 2001

How about the time frame from about 1990 until 2004 when it seemed to work for Apple.
post #158 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

How about the time frame from about 1990 until 2004 when it seemed to work for Apple.

I date I responded with was in reference to the G4 Cube.

Which headless Mac(s) in the consumer price range are you referring to?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #159 of 165
Um, gentlemen, the thread is about the 8-core Mac Pro. If you'd like me to split off the Yet Another Headless Mac Thread posts to their own thread in Future Hardware, I can do that.
--Johnny
Reply
--Johnny
Reply
post #160 of 165
Sorry lundy. I didn't intend to take the thread off track with that.
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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple finally rolls out 8-core Mac Pro