or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › New Intel Xeons offer upgrade path for Mac Pro in early 2009
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Intel Xeons offer upgrade path for Mac Pro in early 2009 - Page 3

post #81 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

Mind you, I can't put it past Apple to make the 24 incher the 'middle' of it's new all LED line up. £550 quid for a 24 inch monitor is outrageous. I may as well plump the rest down for a 30 incher...and suck it up.

It is expensive, but there isn't anything to compare it against yet. Most of the cheap desktop displays have very poor viewing angles. Maybe it's not a selling point for you, but there aren't a whole lot of monitors with a camera & mic in them, many don't have speakers, all those hook up with a single connector on this new display. LEDs seem to allow for a lot more even backlighting. And frankly, I think the looks of the product should come into play. If you don't care, that's fine, but I think all these should at least be acknowledged. There isn't anything that says you have to buy Apple's model either, Macs will work with just about any display out there.
post #82 of 92
Quote:
It is expensive, but there isn't anything to compare it against yet. Most of the cheap desktop displays have very poor viewing angles. Maybe it's not a selling point for you, but there aren't a whole lot of monitors with a camera & mic in them, many don't have speakers, all those hook up with a single connector on this new display. LEDs seem to allow for a lot more even backlighting. And frankly, I think the looks of the product should come into play. If you don't care, that's fine, but I think all these should at least be acknowledged. There isn't anything that says you have to buy Apple's model either, Macs will work with just about any display out there.

Good post.

Yeh. Nothing to compare it to yet. And I've no doubt it will be a thing of beauty. And Apple's got me there. I guess we'll have to wait a/ for the competition and b/ the rest of the LED line.

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #83 of 92
Quote:
As you know by now, me too!

Well... *Plays mood music.

Y'know. If ONLY the Cube had succeeded. Apple's brilliantly failed attempt at a mid-tower? And anybody remember the G5 low end tower for £995? And the more affordable G3 days of Towerness before the iMac became a social climber? I don't think it's difficult. I rather knife the Mac Mini SOB and reborn the AluCube. 8x8 inches, baybee.

Looks.*

Gets out tiny violin.*

The next 8 weeks are going to kill me... I

I have chalk marks on the wall...

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #84 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

I wouldn't be so sure of that. We don't know how many buy the iMac because they really want an iMac and how many bought one because Apple gave them no other option in their price range. Trust me, I didn't buy the iMac for the elegance and simplicity of an all in one. And if I had an option of another form factor, I would have taken it in a heartbeat. No matter how good you try and make it, an all in one will always have certain weaknesses. Many of the things I did not like about my performa 5200 are still there 13 years later in the iMac.

The advantage of shoehorning your users into where you want them to be is that it makes it very easy to justify your own philosophy. They can't make a decision other than the one you want if you don't give a choice.

Going by the reported expectations of Apple's iMac sales, vs Apple's Mac Pro sales, it's not hard to determine that the Mac Pro isn't stealing many sales from the iMac line.

We know where most of the Mac Pro sales are going, and we know where most of the iMac sales are going.

Do I have the actual numbers right now? No, I don't, feel comforted.

But, other publications and organizations have reported over the years approximate sales for each. The iMacs outsell the Mac Pros by a wide margin. If what you said were true, that margin would be much lower.

I don't find it credible to think that many people would look at an iMac that costs between $1,200 and about $2,200 complete, and instead move to a Mac Pro that would cost a good $1,000 more, if they didn't need it.

If, somehow, they did, then the argument for the so called xMac is moot—it's not needed!

It doesn't really matter if people like yourself didn't buy the iMac because of what it is instead of what you would have preferred.

YOU could have bought that Mac Pro you're saying other people who don't want the iMac are buying. But you didn't.

You also could have bought a cheaper Windows machine, as several people keep threatening they will.

The point you're missing here, is that you DID buy the iMac, and so have many others who MIGHT have wanted a mini tower.

That's the entire point.
post #85 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Going by the reported expectations of Apple's iMac sales, vs Apple's Mac Pro sales, it's not hard to determine that the Mac Pro isn't stealing many sales from the iMac line.

We know where most of the Mac Pro sales are going, and we know where most of the iMac sales are going.

Do I have the actual numbers right now? No, I don't, feel comforted.

But, other publications and organizations have reported over the years approximate sales for each. The iMacs outsell the Mac Pros by a wide margin. If what you said were true, that margin would be much lower.

I don't find it credible to think that many people would look at an iMac that costs between $1,200 and about $2,200 complete, and instead move to a Mac Pro that would cost a good $1,000 more, if they didn't need it.

If, somehow, they did, then the argument for the so called xMac is mootit's not needed!

This twisting to literal interpretations crap is really starting to get under my skin. We're not talking about the current $2299 Mac Pro based on an intel 5400 chipset with xeon 5400-series quad core CPUs taking sales away from the current 20 and 24 inch iMac based on custom Core 2 CPUs with a variation of the P965 chipset. We're talking about a hypothetical lower end Mac Pro based on a Core i7 CPU vs an iMac.


Quote:
It doesn't really matter if people like yourself didn't buy the iMac because of what it is instead of what you would have preferred.

YOU could have bought that Mac Pro you're saying other people who don't want the iMac are buying. But you didn't.

Yeah, i could have bought a brand new truck and a house in Malibu too. Unfortunately those of us who live in reality have this thing called a budget. Since the trees on our back yards don't know $100 bills, we're not able to spend an extra grand here and an extra grand there to make Apple happy. There's also this little thing called self respect. Jobs apparently thinks the average Mac user is a mindless idiot willing to do whatever he says and pay whatever he wants them to.

Quote:
You also could have bought a cheaper Windows machine, as several people keep threatening they will.

Actually, I would have been about $1700. The frequency of the "Do whatever Apple says or we don want you on the Mac" answers shows up leads me to think is there is something seriously wrong with this platform and its users. Its looking more like Jamestown or Waco and less like a computer platform every year. You either have to do whatever Apple says without question or you and your investment of thousands

Quote:
The point you're missing here, is that you DID buy the iMac, and so have many others who MIGHT have wanted a mini tower.

That's the entire point.

What because Apple forced me into an inferior machine means they're somehow right? I would say that they're pretty good at taking advantage of the situation. And if someday we take you up on that offer? Who will be left when the windows switchers desert the platform? That's right nobody but cheap windows users would ever do that.
post #86 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't find it credible to think that many people would look at an iMac that costs between $1,200 and about $2,200 complete, and instead move to a Mac Pro that would cost a good $1,000 more, if they didn't need it.

If, somehow, they did, then the argument for the so called xMac is mootit's not needed!

Maybe I missed something but the point of the argument is and has been for the same price of a 'high end iMac' with notebook parts, no quad core options, pathetic GPU's you can buy a new/build new PC for the same price with all new Core i7 Parts in it oh and they support 24GB of ram.

I don't want another iMac and I refuse to pay for an unnecessary MacPro (I do print/web design I don't need overpriced CPU/RAM and server parts) so this is a huge need for a x-mac in my field because desktops are now just as powerful as the workstations and for 50% less money.
You win, I've switched sides.
Reply
You win, I've switched sides.
Reply
post #87 of 92
We have dozens of G5s in our studio and creative departments that will need to be replaced early next year and getting Mac Pros for $2299 plus a 4GB RAM upgrade & Applecare equals no chance. The G5's we got were not cheap by any means but we got them with decent memory and AC for less than $2000. iMacs are not an option for these users.

So what happens is that only 50% of the users get upgraded to new machines and the rest limp along on the G5s. Not that they are bad machines, and with a RAM upgrade and video card upgrade can prove to be useful. But it's unfortunate there is that huge disparity that leave many people hanging. I mean it's been thrown around to move these people to Windows/Dell but i know half of the creatives will just quit, the rest will complain and make IT miserable.
post #88 of 92
Quote:
Unfortunately those of us who live in reality have this thing called a budget. Since the trees on our back yards don't know $100 bills, we're not able to spend an extra grand here and an extra grand there to make Apple happy. There's also this little thing called self respect. Jobs apparently thinks the average Mac user is a mindless idiot willing to do whatever he says and pay whatever he wants them to.

I'm not quite sure Jobs believes that. But you are right concerning 'budgets'. Credit crunch and the real world.

Quote:
This twisting to literal interpretations crap is really starting to get under my skin. We're not talking about the current $2299 Mac Pro based on an intel 5400 chipset with xeon 5400-series quad core CPUs taking sales away from the current 20 and 24 inch iMac based on custom Core 2 CPUs with a variation of the P965 chipset. We're talking about a hypothetical lower end Mac Pro based on a Core i7 CPU vs an iMac.

*nods. How Dell can beat Apple to the i7 chipset is embarrassing. Apple created the iMac or Mac Pro argument. The iMac is a social climber desktop. It should be Apple's entry level in my mind starting at £695 and top out at £1200 tops. Take off the 'expensive' (judging by the prices Apple charges 'fleeces' its users by for the 22 inch...) 24 inch monitor and you could have a headless iMac with quadcore and a decent gpu.

And while I'll accept the iMac for the Aunty Gladice Windows switchers as one big desktop iPod of simplicity...there's plenty of semi and hardcore tower users that would love an upgradeable tower based on that one word. 'Reality'. And it would be easy to price it between £795 and £1495, be based on the i7 quad-core AND include a decent gpu. The iMac doesn't make the mid-tower question obselete. Apple came out with the MBAir and it looks like an overpriced niche white elephant compared to the new Macbooks and Macbook Pros. I'd argue the mid-tower market is much bigger by comparison. Superfluous? Yes. If it's on Apple's terms it seems. Apple could use the i7 chipset for desktops in their entry Mac Pro and make this whole argument go away. The resulting savings from the Xeon class prices would be immediately obvious. But Apple has it's politics. The entry level Mac Pro looks tired and old compared to the prices on the PC side. Apple just aren't keeping pace. You have half a product cycle where Apple looks competitive and half a cycle where they look outclassed in value.

Quote:
Maybe I missed something but the point of the argument is and has been for the same price of a 'high end iMac' with notebook parts, no quad core options, pathetic GPU's you can buy a new/build new PC for the same price with all new Core i7 Parts in it oh and they support 24GB of ram.

I don't want another iMac and I refuse to pay for an unnecessary MacPro (I do print/web design I don't need overpriced CPU/RAM and server parts) so this is a huge need for a x-mac in my field because desktops are now just as powerful as the workstations and for 50% less money.

You didn't miss anything. In fact, you slamn dunked Melgross. Still, in fairness to Melgross, I think he did say nobody wanted a mid-tower more than he. Which makes his other hypertheticals on the iMac/Mac Pro mute. ie stating the obvious. Apple's playing politics with design. Sure, they look 'cool' but they're using overpriced server chips to make their Mac Pro desktop bleeding expensive...and laptop parts in their iMac to make it unecessarily expensive and restrict choice of parts that perform better on both the cpu and GPU front. It's hard to say the iMac isn't a success or isn't beautiful or isn't working. It clearly is (in the absence of anything else perhaps?) And it's hard to say the Xeon based Pro's aren't powerful or don't hit their intended market - they do and are cheaper compared to vendors like Dell and even 'Overclockers.co.uk'. However, both sites are now offering an i7 desktop, with performance and prices Apple aren't matching right now. And that is a fact. And THAT is what annoys X-Mac fans. ie the bloody obvious. That Apple forces a restrictive line up. Sure. Go buy a crappy Windows based system, buy an elegant but restrictive iMac or pawn your Grandmother for the unnecessarily priced Mac Pro. They could easily over a cheaper 'iMac' with choice. ie a Cube. They could easily offer a mid-tower 'Pro'. Both models are the X-Mac. Based on a desktop i7 chipset losing the premium pricing of unnecessary monitor, unnecessary laptop and server class premiums. That's several hundreds of pounds cheaper for a desktop and they can still turn a decent profit.

One thing I would like Melgross to do is actually show us the 'mid-tower' designs he put forward to his Apple 'insiders'. *Looks invitingly.

Lemon Bon Bon

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #89 of 92
Quote:
We have dozens of G5s in our studio and creative departments that will need to be replaced early next year and getting Mac Pros for $2299 plus a 4GB RAM upgrade & Applecare equals no chance. The G5's we got were not cheap by any means but we got them with decent memory and AC for less than $2000. iMacs are not an option for these users.

So what happens is that only 50% of the users get upgraded to new machines and the rest limp along on the G5s. Not that they are bad machines, and with a RAM upgrade and video card upgrade can prove to be useful. But it's unfortunate there is that huge disparity that leave many people hanging. I mean it's been thrown around to move these people to Windows/Dell but i know half of the creatives will just quit, the rest will complain and make IT miserable.

Perish the thought they offered their tower customers true choice and I'm not talking about the option for Spanish keyboards.

The G5 towers started the ridiculous price hike of the Towers. Clearly if they sell 100k of these they feel vindicated. :I

They'd sell a hell alot more if they offered a much cheaper desktop based version. Xeon. Shmeon.

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #90 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


That Apple forces a restrictive line up. Sure. Go buy a crappy Windows based system, buy an elegant but restrictive iMac or pawn your Grandmother for the unnecessarily priced Mac Pro.

I wouldn't call the Mac Pro unnecessarily priced, as much as plugging up one hole by creating another. They offered the workstation the highest end Mac Professionals had wanted, but they gave up their prosumer desktop to do so. If you're a professional with extreme needs, its a wonderful machine at an unbeatable price. If you're a higher end consumer moving up to it because Apple doesn't over any type of desktop (AIO is a different category), you're paying for a lot of expensive components that you don't need.
post #91 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

Perish the thought they offered their tower customers true choice and I'm not talking about the option for Spanish keyboards.

The G5 towers started the ridiculous price hike of the Towers. Clearly if they sell 100k of these they feel vindicated. :I

They'd sell a hell alot more if they offered a much cheaper desktop based version. Xeon. Shmeon.

Lemon Bon Bon.

At least when the G5 was released in 2003 they still had a G4 tower to fill in the low end tower market.
post #92 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

At least when the G5 was released in 2003 they still had a G4 tower to fill in the low end tower market.

Which was then replaced by a G5 at the same general price point.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › New Intel Xeons offer upgrade path for Mac Pro in early 2009