Please direct us to the last pro-Apple comment you've had. Or for that matter, please point us to the last thread you haven't mentioned:
a) lack of matte screens on iMac's
b) the heat of the ATV and no on/off switch
c) the iPhone not running more than one app at a time
d) the iPhone not running flash
e) how stupid the LP format is
f) some mention of koolaid, fanbois, juice, etc
The list can go on and on.
Why wouldn''t I mention the first five? I don't need to direct you anywhere - you only remember what you've written anyway. Never used the term fanboi- sorry.
I need to replace my aging PowerPC Dual 2.0ghz G5. But I see nothing from Apple to replace it with. An iMac is a downgrade even if it is faster. But I can't justify spending $4k on a Mac Pro. Come on Apple. I'd be happy with the Mac Pro with the single processor, but leave it to Apple to cripple it with the lack of memory slots.
Not trying to be sarcastic or anything, but specifically what specs in an Imac make it a "downgrade"? Is it just you don't like the all in one form factor?
I need to replace my aging PowerPC Dual 2.0ghz G5. But I see nothing from Apple to replace it with. An iMac is a downgrade even if it is faster. But I can't justify spending $4k on a Mac Pro. Come on Apple. I'd be happy with the Mac Pro with the single processor, but leave it to Apple to cripple it with the lack of memory slots.
The iMac is going to turn into a "nettop", just like the MacBook Airs. Nothing to the thing. Very portable. Buy any thing else extra for more money, external dvd, etc.. Forget Blueray, it's too expensive and Sony will protect it's media and computer arms. You want it?, buy third party and can't play movies from Walmart.
The business with Nvida, Intel integrated graphics, Apple's fondness for thinness, green fling, economy etc all points to cheap, labor reduced, nearly nothing consumer computers with cheap glare prone screens. (spaying a anti-reflection film is cheaper than applying a matte screen for LCD makers)
Apple will put on it's fancy tag, and people will pay or flock to Windows 7's netbooks.
And if you can't think for yourself and need to classify people trolls by various degrees just because they might disagree with something, anything Apple than what are you? No one on are here constantly does what you accuse them of- THAT'S only coming from your own warped fanbot imagination.
TeckDud ... go back over your posting history .... "some" people do have over an 80% complain rate ... that, to me, represents either a lack of imagination, or the willingness to be described as a troll .... your call.
Just because you don't demand one, doesn't mean there is no demand at all. A mid-level tower is likely the MOST questioned absence in Apple's lineup. I would love a Mac Pro, but they are pricey. I love my 2006 vintage 24" iMac, but I'd love to be able to upgrade it even more. Mid-level tower with maybe 3 slots and 2 HD sleds would be the shiznit. Look beyond the nose on your face. The world is larger than what you seem to perceive.
The thing is, there is no question of a demand for a mid range tower ... but how big a demand? I'm sure that Apple have considered all options in deciding what market to pursue. They have already said, many times, they are not trying to be everything to everybody. Their success story is good enough for me to give them the benefit of the doubt in making sound business decisions. Are they going to be right all the time ... no, but no one bats 1000.
Not trying to be sarcastic or anything, but specifically what specs in an Imac make it a "downgrade"? Is it just you don't like the all in one form factor?
Never had a Mac Pro huh?
A iMac is a serious downgrade from that bad boy, believe me.
1: You can replace the hard drives for faster and bigger ones. The machine is open for you to do what you need to do and Apple even sends you new drives if your factory one dies for self-install.
2: You can RAID 0 your boot drive with the fastest drives available, making applications boot nearly instantly on screen. Boot times in under 20 seconds.
3: You have access to faster drive interfaces. Install more or faster RAM. Third party cards and toys.
4: You can upgrade the video card for more performance or add more.
5: Want a larger monitor? Matte screen? No problem. Want a half dozen 30" monitors? No problem.
6: You want to edit HD video in real time, render 3D, ray trace etc. No problem.
A Mac Pro is a dream machine for the general consumer geek, I had one, spent nearly $15,000 in machine, upgrades and software over the years, but used it mostly to 3D game (two at once on my PPC dual 2) Unnecessary now with the cheaper PS3 and loads of titles and online players.
It's going to be tough goings with future third party and specialized upgrades for Mac Pro's, the demand for that sort of machine is falling in the consumer market because of cheaper consoles, then the economy naturally... pro's will be paying a lot more.
A iMac is a serious downgrade from that bad boy, believe me.
1: You can replace the hard drives for faster and bigger ones. The machine is open for you to do what you need to do and Apple even sends you new drives if your factory one dies for self-install.
2: You can RAID 0 your boot drive with the fastest drives available, making applications boot nearly instantly on screen. Boot times in under 20 seconds.
3: You have access to faster drive interfaces. Install more or faster RAM. Third party cards and toys.
4: You can upgrade the video card for more performance or add more.
5: Want a larger monitor? Matte screen? No problem. Want a half dozen 30" monitors? No problem.
6: You want to edit HD video in real time, render 3D, ray trace etc. No problem.
A Mac Pro is a dream machine for the general consumer geek, I had one, spent nearly $15,000 in machine, upgrades and software over the years, but used it mostly to 3D game (two at once on my PPC dual 2) Unnecessary now with the cheaper PS3 and loads of titles and online players.
It's going to be tough goings with future third party and specialized upgrades for Mac Pro's, the demand for that sort of machine is falling in the consumer market because of cheaper consoles, then the economy naturally... pro's will be paying a lot more.
It's true , I can't do all of that on my 24" iMac. Having said that, I am going to upgrade HD from original 250GB to 1500 GB, not doing it myself mind you. I envy your ability to spend 15,000.00 on computing power, even if it's mainly to play games (not a gamer myself, other than a very few). I have "lusted" over the mac pro since its intro ... just can't justify the cost, for me at least. The iMac is a great "second choice" tho. Good luck in your future purchase.
With the Mac Pro so far beyond the average users needs, the desktop field shows up even more distinctly as the Mini and the iMac. One minimal computer and the other an AIO, neither really serviceable, and neither what a lot of desktop users need or want. How can anyone deny that Apple has zero consideration for Apple users who want a real choice? I'm not suggesting that isn't Apple's right or that it is its obligation, but even so, how does Apple expect users to be 'faithful' when it isn't faithful to its users? I keep repeating, ad nauseam, that SJ holds the club of OS X over our heads, and with it, ensures that we'll buy whatever he wants us to buy.
Some AI member said he hoped that Psystar would win the court case. I wouldn't go that far because I don't think this situation is really about hardware. I hope that someday someone will build a Unix OS to go head to head with OS X. I think Apple would trip all over themselves fielding computers that users want. Right now, Apple holds all the (OS) cards. Now don't tell me to buy a PC if I don't like Apple's output. That OS X club is over my head, also
With the Mac Pro so far beyond the average users needs, the desktop field shows up even more distinctly as the Mini and the iMac. One minimal computer and the other an AIO, neither really serviceable, and neither what a lot of desktop users need or want. How can anyone deny that Apple has zero consideration for Apple users who want a real choice?
So basically, you want a cheap computer that you can throw whatever bargain basement hardware you can find into, and also be able to take it in to an Apple Store for service when one of those cheap components causes problems?
That's the real problem here. If you let people modify a computer which has a great warranty/service plan, then inevitably, you're going to get a lot more people using that service plan due to their own negligence and/or the shoddy 3rd party components they install. Thus, it costs much more money to support that computer in the long run and so it's impossible to sell that computer at a low cost and still give the same level of service.
For PCs it's not a big deal because most PC service plans suck compared to Apple's (scripted ESL phone service reps and long RMAs anyone?). And I'm sure most will tell you where to go if you've installed any components yourself (aside from maybe RAM).
And with the Mac Pro, it's not as big a problem because:
There is a larger profit margin on it and so you can afford to provide that level of service
It's generally being used by people for whom the savings of buying cheap components is largely outweighed by the loss of productivity if/when those components fail (i.e. people purchasing computers for business). So they'll tend to opt for higher quality, Apple-certified components installed by a professional whom they can go back to if something fails.
As for general consumers, contrary to what you think, computer owners who install/replace components themselves are not in the majority. Computers are a lot like cars for most people: you buy one, and if something goes wrong, you take it to the dealer (if you're under warranty) or the repair shop (if you're not and you can't afford qualified service). You use it for a few years (a few more years for cars than computers) and then eventually you sell it or recycle it (based on it's condition/value) and buy a new one. That's the extent of your involvement with it.
You wouldn't expect a car company to build a cheap car which supports easy owner-serviceability and provide a long warranty which covers that car for free service no matter what the owner does to the car. That car manufacturer would soon be out of business due to the high cost of honoring those warranties. The same goes for computers.
So basically, you want a cheap computer that you can throw whatever bargain basement hardware you can find into, and also be able to take it in to an Apple Store for service when one of those cheap components causes problems?
That's the real problem here. If you let people modify a computer which has a great warranty/service plan, then inevitably, you're going to get a lot more people using that service plan due to their own negligence and/or the shoddy 3rd party components they install. Thus, it costs much more money to support that computer in the long run and so it's impossible to sell that computer at a low cost and still give the same level of service.
For PCs it's not a big deal because most PC service plans suck compared to Apple's (scripted ESL phone service reps and long RMAs anyone?). And I'm sure most will tell you where to go if you've installed any components yourself (aside from maybe RAM).
And with the Mac Pro, it's not as big a problem because:
There is a larger profit margin on it and so you can afford to provide that level of service
It's generally being used by people for whom the savings of buying cheap components is largely outweighed by the loss of productivity if/when those components fail (i.e. people purchasing computers for business). So they'll tend to opt for higher quality, Apple-certified components installed by a professional whom they can go back to if something fails.
As for general consumers, contrary to what you think, computer owners who install/replace components themselves are not in the majority. Computers are a lot like cars for most people: you buy one, and if something goes wrong, you take it to the dealer (if you're under warranty) or the repair shop (if you're not and you can't afford qualified service). You use it for a few years (a few more years for cars than computers) and then eventually you sell it or recycle it (based on it's condition/value) and buy a new one. That's the extent of your involvement with it.
You wouldn't expect a car company to build a cheap car which supports easy owner-serviceability and provide a long warranty which covers that car for free service no matter what the owner does to the car. That car manufacturer would soon be out of business due to the high cost of honoring those warranties. The same goes for computers.
Yup the best option is to be a sheep noob hipster, buy overpriced slow computers with yesterday's components and NEVER expect to be able to upgrade the hardware of your computer if the master "Apple" thinks you dont need it! Also if you need more storage, use the built in "iDelete" feature to free up Hard drive space! Sounds like a perfect plan!
It's hardly meant for general home use, hence the "Pro" label.
If you're a "Pro" you wouldn't be paying for it out of pocket. In most cases it can also be written off, too, if you can demonstrate it's for work/business/home-as-regular-business-establishment use.
"Pro" has been a watered down term and means little these days. Apple is better than most, but still.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant
Anyway... back on subject. I'm due an upgrade, but 128 mb of memory? $$$$
I can't store a bit with 128 millibit storage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jocknerd
I need to replace my aging PowerPC Dual 2.0ghz G5. But I see nothing from Apple to replace it with. An iMac is a downgrade even if it is faster. But I can't justify spending $4k on a Mac Pro. Come on Apple. I'd be happy with the Mac Pro with the single processor, but leave it to Apple to cripple it with the lack of memory slots.
Isn't it still four slots? 4GB in each slot would give you 16GB total.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisManuel
Blu-ray uses H.264 or MPEG2 for compression. Both CODECs have been supported in FCP and Compressor for a long time. What's missing is any ability to author Blu-Ray compatible discs (add menuing or any other value-added feature) from Apple's "pro" apps. Of course Apple responds with the statement that Blu-ray isn't a finalized standard so they are going to wait to support it when it's final. It's enough of a standard that Blockbuster rents and sells the discs but maybe that isn't mass market enough for the iPhone company.
I don't recall Apple saying Blu-Ray isn't a finalized format. For a while, it wasn't, but 2.0 has been standard for a year now. 1.0 gave me what I wanted anyway, the movie in HD.
What happened to VC1 anyway? I don't expect Apple to support it, but it seems to be an ignored CODEC now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
It means Apple Mac Pros will no longer be crippled and hold the standard 128GB capacity of typical Intel Server/Workstation boards.
Xeon systems have been ready to run 128GB for several years.
In order to compare in the same way, you do need the same number of slots, because the other makers will probably still offer the more slots than Apple and offer the same memory per slot as Apple does, unless there is some odd limitation in the number of ranks of memory. I didn't notice a line that said that Apple was adding slots. But that's a lot of memory. A two 6 core processor system and 128GB of memory is a pretty impressive machine. It makes me wish I could do something that justifies that.
So basically, you want a cheap computer that you can throw whatever bargain basement hardware you can find into, and also be able to take it in to an Apple Store for service when one of those cheap components causes problems?
No, I don't want a cheap computer. No bargain basement hardware. You didn't get that from my post. You pulled that out of thin air.
I want a decent quality Mac that falls between a Mini and an IMac. I might only add memory to the more expensive Mac which should have better specs than the Mini. If and when the HDD failed, I could replace it without hassle.
I bought a G4 tower and a 22" ACD 7 years ago. The ACD is still like new while the G4 is a dinosaur. That convinced me not to buy an iMac. That left me with no other choice except the Mini. Don't get me wrong. I love the mini. I would just have liked something with somewhat better specs but not an AIO or a Mac Pro that would be extremely overkill for me. I can afford a Mac Pro no matter the cost. I just don't need it. Why buy a Mercedes when an Acura will get me to work and back.
Comments
Please direct us to the last pro-Apple comment you've had. Or for that matter, please point us to the last thread you haven't mentioned:
a) lack of matte screens on iMac's
b) the heat of the ATV and no on/off switch
c) the iPhone not running more than one app at a time
d) the iPhone not running flash
e) how stupid the LP format is
f) some mention of koolaid, fanbois, juice, etc
The list can go on and on.
Why wouldn''t I mention the first five? I don't need to direct you anywhere - you only remember what you've written anyway. Never used the term fanboi- sorry.
Anyway... back on subject. I'm due an upgrade, but 128 mb of memory? $$$$
That's Gig not meg.
I need to replace my aging PowerPC Dual 2.0ghz G5. But I see nothing from Apple to replace it with. An iMac is a downgrade even if it is faster. But I can't justify spending $4k on a Mac Pro. Come on Apple. I'd be happy with the Mac Pro with the single processor, but leave it to Apple to cripple it with the lack of memory slots.
Not trying to be sarcastic or anything, but specifically what specs in an Imac make it a "downgrade"? Is it just you don't like the all in one form factor?
I need to replace my aging PowerPC Dual 2.0ghz G5. But I see nothing from Apple to replace it with. An iMac is a downgrade even if it is faster. But I can't justify spending $4k on a Mac Pro. Come on Apple. I'd be happy with the Mac Pro with the single processor, but leave it to Apple to cripple it with the lack of memory slots.
The iMac is going to turn into a "nettop", just like the MacBook Airs. Nothing to the thing. Very portable. Buy any thing else extra for more money, external dvd, etc.. Forget Blueray, it's too expensive and Sony will protect it's media and computer arms. You want it?, buy third party and can't play movies from Walmart.
The business with Nvida, Intel integrated graphics, Apple's fondness for thinness, green fling, economy etc all points to cheap, labor reduced, nearly nothing consumer computers with cheap glare prone screens. (spaying a anti-reflection film is cheaper than applying a matte screen for LCD makers)
Apple will put on it's fancy tag, and people will pay or flock to Windows 7's netbooks.
And if you can't think for yourself and need to classify people trolls by various degrees just because they might disagree with something, anything Apple than what are you? No one on are here constantly does what you accuse them of- THAT'S only coming from your own warped fanbot imagination.
TeckDud ... go back over your posting history .... "some" people do have over an 80% complain rate ... that, to me, represents either a lack of imagination, or the willingness to be described as a troll .... your call.
Just because you don't demand one, doesn't mean there is no demand at all. A mid-level tower is likely the MOST questioned absence in Apple's lineup. I would love a Mac Pro, but they are pricey. I love my 2006 vintage 24" iMac, but I'd love to be able to upgrade it even more. Mid-level tower with maybe 3 slots and 2 HD sleds would be the shiznit. Look beyond the nose on your face. The world is larger than what you seem to perceive.
The thing is, there is no question of a demand for a mid range tower ... but how big a demand? I'm sure that Apple have considered all options in deciding what market to pursue. They have already said, many times, they are not trying to be everything to everybody. Their success story is good enough for me to give them the benefit of the doubt in making sound business decisions. Are they going to be right all the time ... no, but no one bats 1000.
Thurrott is the ultimate MS supporter and not that kind to Apple or Mac OS X since that quote.....
And this is news, why?
Not trying to be sarcastic or anything, but specifically what specs in an Imac make it a "downgrade"? Is it just you don't like the all in one form factor?
Never had a Mac Pro huh?
A iMac is a serious downgrade from that bad boy, believe me.
1: You can replace the hard drives for faster and bigger ones. The machine is open for you to do what you need to do and Apple even sends you new drives if your factory one dies for self-install.
2: You can RAID 0 your boot drive with the fastest drives available, making applications boot nearly instantly on screen. Boot times in under 20 seconds.
3: You have access to faster drive interfaces. Install more or faster RAM. Third party cards and toys.
4: You can upgrade the video card for more performance or add more.
5: Want a larger monitor? Matte screen? No problem. Want a half dozen 30" monitors? No problem.
6: You want to edit HD video in real time, render 3D, ray trace etc. No problem.
A Mac Pro is a dream machine for the general consumer geek, I had one, spent nearly $15,000 in machine, upgrades and software over the years, but used it mostly to 3D game (two at once on my PPC dual 2) Unnecessary now with the cheaper PS3 and loads of titles and online players.
It's going to be tough goings with future third party and specialized upgrades for Mac Pro's, the demand for that sort of machine is falling in the consumer market because of cheaper consoles, then the economy naturally... pro's will be paying a lot more.
Yeah I like his site for some of his info on Windows stuff.
He has some very good info for Windows.
Yea, and what I like is he's not biased, hardly at all, really, no, I mean it.
The wonder of Apple? Did you really type that?
It's a computer company.
Yes, and they make wonderful computers.
For the average Pro, what kind of speed improvements over the current gen are we talking about?
10%?
Do you have your finger poked in your cheek as you write that?
You suck your thumb, I poke my cheek ... nearly the same.
I've never used the term "fanboi"- fanbot maybe, but never fanboi- much too elementary.
At least I don't write these long whiney diatribes like you do. Eeeewwwww.
If you knew more words, you might.
Never had a Mac Pro huh?
A iMac is a serious downgrade from that bad boy, believe me.
1: You can replace the hard drives for faster and bigger ones. The machine is open for you to do what you need to do and Apple even sends you new drives if your factory one dies for self-install.
2: You can RAID 0 your boot drive with the fastest drives available, making applications boot nearly instantly on screen. Boot times in under 20 seconds.
3: You have access to faster drive interfaces. Install more or faster RAM. Third party cards and toys.
4: You can upgrade the video card for more performance or add more.
5: Want a larger monitor? Matte screen? No problem. Want a half dozen 30" monitors? No problem.
6: You want to edit HD video in real time, render 3D, ray trace etc. No problem.
A Mac Pro is a dream machine for the general consumer geek, I had one, spent nearly $15,000 in machine, upgrades and software over the years, but used it mostly to 3D game (two at once on my PPC dual 2) Unnecessary now with the cheaper PS3 and loads of titles and online players.
It's going to be tough goings with future third party and specialized upgrades for Mac Pro's, the demand for that sort of machine is falling in the consumer market because of cheaper consoles, then the economy naturally... pro's will be paying a lot more.
It's true , I can't do all of that on my 24" iMac. Having said that, I am going to upgrade HD from original 250GB to 1500 GB, not doing it myself mind you. I envy your ability to spend 15,000.00 on computing power, even if it's mainly to play games (not a gamer myself, other than a very few). I have "lusted" over the mac pro since its intro ... just can't justify the cost, for me at least. The iMac is a great "second choice" tho. Good luck in your future purchase.
Some AI member said he hoped that Psystar would win the court case. I wouldn't go that far because I don't think this situation is really about hardware. I hope that someday someone will build a Unix OS to go head to head with OS X. I think Apple would trip all over themselves fielding computers that users want. Right now, Apple holds all the (OS) cards. Now don't tell me to buy a PC if I don't like Apple's output. That OS X club is over my head, also
Too bad Linux doesn't live up to its potential.
With the Mac Pro so far beyond the average users needs, the desktop field shows up even more distinctly as the Mini and the iMac. One minimal computer and the other an AIO, neither really serviceable, and neither what a lot of desktop users need or want. How can anyone deny that Apple has zero consideration for Apple users who want a real choice?
So basically, you want a cheap computer that you can throw whatever bargain basement hardware you can find into, and also be able to take it in to an Apple Store for service when one of those cheap components causes problems?
That's the real problem here. If you let people modify a computer which has a great warranty/service plan, then inevitably, you're going to get a lot more people using that service plan due to their own negligence and/or the shoddy 3rd party components they install. Thus, it costs much more money to support that computer in the long run and so it's impossible to sell that computer at a low cost and still give the same level of service.
For PCs it's not a big deal because most PC service plans suck compared to Apple's (scripted ESL phone service reps and long RMAs anyone?). And I'm sure most will tell you where to go if you've installed any components yourself (aside from maybe RAM).
And with the Mac Pro, it's not as big a problem because:
- There is a larger profit margin on it and so you can afford to provide that level of service
- It's generally being used by people for whom the savings of buying cheap components is largely outweighed by the loss of productivity if/when those components fail (i.e. people purchasing computers for business). So they'll tend to opt for higher quality, Apple-certified components installed by a professional whom they can go back to if something fails.
As for general consumers, contrary to what you think, computer owners who install/replace components themselves are not in the majority. Computers are a lot like cars for most people: you buy one, and if something goes wrong, you take it to the dealer (if you're under warranty) or the repair shop (if you're not and you can't afford qualified service). You use it for a few years (a few more years for cars than computers) and then eventually you sell it or recycle it (based on it's condition/value) and buy a new one. That's the extent of your involvement with it.You wouldn't expect a car company to build a cheap car which supports easy owner-serviceability and provide a long warranty which covers that car for free service no matter what the owner does to the car. That car manufacturer would soon be out of business due to the high cost of honoring those warranties. The same goes for computers.
So basically, you want a cheap computer that you can throw whatever bargain basement hardware you can find into, and also be able to take it in to an Apple Store for service when one of those cheap components causes problems?
That's the real problem here. If you let people modify a computer which has a great warranty/service plan, then inevitably, you're going to get a lot more people using that service plan due to their own negligence and/or the shoddy 3rd party components they install. Thus, it costs much more money to support that computer in the long run and so it's impossible to sell that computer at a low cost and still give the same level of service.
For PCs it's not a big deal because most PC service plans suck compared to Apple's (scripted ESL phone service reps and long RMAs anyone?). And I'm sure most will tell you where to go if you've installed any components yourself (aside from maybe RAM).
And with the Mac Pro, it's not as big a problem because:
- There is a larger profit margin on it and so you can afford to provide that level of service
- It's generally being used by people for whom the savings of buying cheap components is largely outweighed by the loss of productivity if/when those components fail (i.e. people purchasing computers for business). So they'll tend to opt for higher quality, Apple-certified components installed by a professional whom they can go back to if something fails.
As for general consumers, contrary to what you think, computer owners who install/replace components themselves are not in the majority. Computers are a lot like cars for most people: you buy one, and if something goes wrong, you take it to the dealer (if you're under warranty) or the repair shop (if you're not and you can't afford qualified service). You use it for a few years (a few more years for cars than computers) and then eventually you sell it or recycle it (based on it's condition/value) and buy a new one. That's the extent of your involvement with it.You wouldn't expect a car company to build a cheap car which supports easy owner-serviceability and provide a long warranty which covers that car for free service no matter what the owner does to the car. That car manufacturer would soon be out of business due to the high cost of honoring those warranties. The same goes for computers.
Yup the best option is to be a sheep noob hipster, buy overpriced slow computers with yesterday's components and NEVER expect to be able to upgrade the hardware of your computer if the master "Apple" thinks you dont need it! Also if you need more storage, use the built in "iDelete" feature to free up Hard drive space! Sounds like a perfect plan!
It's hardly meant for general home use, hence the "Pro" label.
If you're a "Pro" you wouldn't be paying for it out of pocket. In most cases it can also be written off, too, if you can demonstrate it's for work/business/home-as-regular-business-establishment use.
"Pro" has been a watered down term and means little these days. Apple is better than most, but still.
Anyway... back on subject. I'm due an upgrade, but 128 mb of memory? $$$$
I can't store a bit with 128 millibit storage.
I need to replace my aging PowerPC Dual 2.0ghz G5. But I see nothing from Apple to replace it with. An iMac is a downgrade even if it is faster. But I can't justify spending $4k on a Mac Pro. Come on Apple. I'd be happy with the Mac Pro with the single processor, but leave it to Apple to cripple it with the lack of memory slots.
Isn't it still four slots? 4GB in each slot would give you 16GB total.
Blu-ray uses H.264 or MPEG2 for compression. Both CODECs have been supported in FCP and Compressor for a long time. What's missing is any ability to author Blu-Ray compatible discs (add menuing or any other value-added feature) from Apple's "pro" apps. Of course Apple responds with the statement that Blu-ray isn't a finalized standard so they are going to wait to support it when it's final. It's enough of a standard that Blockbuster rents and sells the discs but maybe that isn't mass market enough for the iPhone company.
I don't recall Apple saying Blu-Ray isn't a finalized format. For a while, it wasn't, but 2.0 has been standard for a year now. 1.0 gave me what I wanted anyway, the movie in HD.
What happened to VC1 anyway? I don't expect Apple to support it, but it seems to be an ignored CODEC now.
It means Apple Mac Pros will no longer be crippled and hold the standard 128GB capacity of typical Intel Server/Workstation boards.
Xeon systems have been ready to run 128GB for several years.
In order to compare in the same way, you do need the same number of slots, because the other makers will probably still offer the more slots than Apple and offer the same memory per slot as Apple does, unless there is some odd limitation in the number of ranks of memory. I didn't notice a line that said that Apple was adding slots. But that's a lot of memory. A two 6 core processor system and 128GB of memory is a pretty impressive machine. It makes me wish I could do something that justifies that.
So basically, you want a cheap computer that you can throw whatever bargain basement hardware you can find into, and also be able to take it in to an Apple Store for service when one of those cheap components causes problems?
No, I don't want a cheap computer. No bargain basement hardware. You didn't get that from my post. You pulled that out of thin air.
I want a decent quality Mac that falls between a Mini and an IMac. I might only add memory to the more expensive Mac which should have better specs than the Mini. If and when the HDD failed, I could replace it without hassle.
I bought a G4 tower and a 22" ACD 7 years ago. The ACD is still like new while the G4 is a dinosaur. That convinced me not to buy an iMac. That left me with no other choice except the Mini. Don't get me wrong. I love the mini. I would just have liked something with somewhat better specs but not an AIO or a Mac Pro that would be extremely overkill for me. I can afford a Mac Pro no matter the cost. I just don't need it. Why buy a Mercedes when an Acura will get me to work and back.