I have seen no evidence that LightPeak is anywhere near ready fort production.
Apple usually isn?t the first to adopt a technology, but they are the first to adopt it across their product line. There isn?t even anything that could use it at this point*.
* Before you or someone else mentions that it?s protocol independent note that while that is true it?s still optical and pretty much every protocol and device you are thinking of is connected via cooper which makes a very, very expensive convertor box? which also doesn?t yet exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
USB 3 is a must but I don't think that would have delayed the release. The final product will likely answer a lot of questions but I will reiterate that if all they do this time round is drop in the expected 3600/5600 Xeons and do nothing else then it will be a pretty disappointing update because besides doing nothing, it's pretty much the least effort they could expend on that lineup.
I wonder. Apple doesn?t like to do a ?simple? update mid cycle to add something that would necessary like USB3.0. It would likely have to come to Macs then their iDevices, and the larger, more powerful and more expensive Macs would likely be the first to get these, IMO, so I can see them holding back on an update if something wasn?t quite right with a product they don?t update more than once a year.
Nice to see Apple remembering that they make Macs, too.
Note Apple just reported a record number of Mac sales in a quarter with an all new MacBook, MacBook Pros and a redesigned Mac Mini. All note that they are resopsonsible for 1/3 of the retail profit of PC sales. I have to think they haven't forgotten the Mac or its potential.
They sure haven't forgotten the profits from the Mac line. Or how to screw a 2 year old cpu eg in the iMac like. See Core 2 Duo for details.
But the Mac Pro IS a forgotten machine. With an outrageous sticker price for a 'mere' quad core starting at an eye watering £2k for a 'workstation' with 'old tech' when it was introduced consumer GPU with laughable ram and HD. How can the flagship Mac computer not have an update in a year and a half? Truly pathetic.
If that isn't 'forgotten'...I don't know what is. Not to mention the 'distant memories' of some kind of display range to accompany it.
The current Mac 'pro' is a goddamn joke. Overpriced. Under-powered. Out of date.
Yes Lemon, we know. It's been 4 days, you couldn't contain your Mac Pro rage The processors in the Mac Pro were definitely top end upon release, the only thing that was poor was the video card options. Currently it is certainly behind the times, no one is arguing that with you. I think you can let go of the anger tho buddy, it's being updated very soon if these reports are right. We'll see exactly how up to date it becomes.
says you. They could definitely stand to slim that thing down in a few areas. .
Yes, it definitely needs a new case but I actually kind of like the big metal case. I mainly just want them to come up with a new look. They seem to have been incorporating the black in with the metal in their other hardware maybe that is what they will do.
They sure haven't forgotten the profits from the Mac line. Or how to screw a 2 year old cpu eg in the iMac like. See Core 2 Duo for details.
But the Mac Pro IS a forgotten machine. With an outrageous sticker price for a 'mere' quad core starting at an eye watering £2k for a 'workstation' with 'old tech' when it was introduced consumer GPU with laughable ram and HD. How can the flagship Mac computer not have an update in a year and a half? Truly pathetic.
If that isn't 'forgotten'...I don't know what is. Not to mention the 'distant memories' of some kind of display range to accompany it.
The current Mac 'pro' is a goddamn joke. Overpriced. Under-powered. Out of date.
In short, nothing short of an absolute disgrace.
Lemon Bon Bon.
I fully agree with Lemon here.
At work we have been waiting fot quite some time to buy new Mac Pro's.
I don't want to buy the current ones because of the reasons stated above (same price as when introduced over a year ago, now old graphics card etc.) and in this case there is no discussion that one feels a bit ?locked? having just Apple as the hardware vendor. Or I guess that would be fine if the updates was more frequent and more in pace with the rest of the industry. I'd also be happy to see a little more hardware options, (not that it should be overwhelming like with Dell and such).
They sure haven't forgotten the profits from the Mac line. Or how to screw a 2 year old cpu eg in the iMac like. See Core 2 Duo for details.
But the Mac Pro IS a forgotten machine. With an outrageous sticker price for a 'mere' quad core starting at an eye watering £2k for a 'workstation' with 'old tech' when it was introduced consumer GPU with laughable ram and HD. How can the flagship Mac computer not have an update in a year and a half? Truly pathetic.
If that isn't 'forgotten'...I don't know what is. Not to mention the 'distant memories' of some kind of display range to accompany it.
The current Mac 'pro' is a goddamn joke. Overpriced. Under-powered. Out of date.
In short, nothing short of an absolute disgrace.
Are you referring to me and my reply to a comment that specified Macs as a whole, not the single model type you specified in your comment? If so, note that I?ve already made a sarcastic remark about the long delay between Mac Pro releases in this thread and have made many mentions over the years to the weakening focus on non-consumer based Apple products, but that doesn?t change the fact that Apple is focused on Macs do to the money they are making and money they can make from them for the foreseeable future.
...The only items in my office are the iMac on my desk, a Brother wireless printer on my credenza and in the closet is a 1' stack of copy paper....nothing else!
I have nothing in my desk draws except one red felt-tip pen....
Where's the Flickr photo set so we can see??
I love the Apple TV screen saver with the photos floating up the screen. I have it pulling from my Flickr.
They're upgrading the Mac Pro? Whats the matter, did they run out of iOS devices to sell?
Nice to see Apple remembering that they make Macs, too.
Is it true you can build one now that gets about the same performance for a fraction of the price? I also thought I read that there is a new script or something that allows you to install updates without having to worry. Can anyone confirm or deny from that osx86 group. Strange how apple leaves them alone. Why server CPU if you can do without that and ECC memory, besides price. Trying to understand as it seems a lot of do it yourselfers swear by it.
says you. They could definitely stand to slim that thing down in a few areas. It weighs like 100lbs and it has 4 spoilers... you know... for keeping it on the ground?
If you allow for the idea that the Pro serves a purpose then you will realize what Apple needs is another product to fill the role of a desktop Mac.
Quote:
Yea, it's totally top heavy. It's truly tower and most of it is hollow space for airflow.
Actually all that space does not assure air flow. If you have hot spots you have to design the machine to provide that air flow. One of the worst things about the old ATX PCs is that many where built by people with zero concern about air flow. Thus a wide range of reliability problems.
Quote:
So what you have is a giant metal wind tunnel. How about instead of the massive super heavy tower, they make something where you swap out the components just as easily, only with half the metal (smaller shipping footprint and materials cost), and naturally the better performance that you'd get from an internals upgrade.
It may be coming if any of the patent applications are to be believed. In a nut shell you are asking for what many of us call an XMac.
Quote:
I don't know how the newest AMD chips compare to the intel chips in regards to performance, but they have way more cores.
AMD isn't as bad as many imply. They trail Intel somewhat in performance. As you note though more cores so in some cases AMD can be a big win.
The real play with AMD will come "real soon now". That would be the combo of Fusion and Bulldozer. Fusion would be almost perfect for the Mini and ought to out perform the current Intel implementation.
The real question is how tied to Intel is Apple? Will the introduce a sub par machine based on the coming Intel hardware instead of the Fusion hardware?
You'll get a real GPU, only it will be a few generations behind what is available for PC's, 30+% dearer and the drivers will be crap so whatever they are they'll perform like PC GPU cards from 2008.
The Nvidians are gatthering a wide arsenal to rule....
The Mac Pro is not a gaming machine but a workstation for people that need heavy number crunching (scientists) or lots of bandwidth (video pros). The fact that it has no BTO on the latest NVidia hairdryer won't bother those customers.
With respect to neglecting the Mac, I think Apple may have a tick-tock strategy. They work on the portable devices until they are at the cutting edge of tech and not much more they can do for a while, then they move to the Mac and innovate there, and then back to the portables and so on. Cross-polinating all the time.
I know portable devices are the new hotness, but lots of people still need/use computers, and it can make a big difference to many people's lives making better computers. The spread of Unix on the desktop also helps the nation's security I think, from foreign hackers.
The Mac Pro on the other hand has never been the type of product Apple has updated frequently. The update free stretch on the current model isnt that far out of the ordinary. So why the whine?
Actually it is out of the ordinary. If you look at MacRumors Buyer's Guide it is the longest time without update since their records started, in 2002.
Dodeca-cores? What are we trying to do by producing these monsters? These machines are already many thousand times faster than the simulator for the first atomic bomb.
Hope "THEY" don't get their hands on a few of these. After all, how much processing power does one need to be productive at work place or at home.
I wonder if they'll bother building a 27". The amount of sales that model will generate is bound to be so low that the price would be high enough for them to be as well making the 27" iMac take a video input. Which they have done.
The attractiveness of the monitor depends upon it feature set. For example a HMDI interface make the monitor much more useful. If that HMDI input is capable of scaling the 1080p signal to the monitors native resolution then all the better. The monitors value istied to features, usable features, and hopefully a little Apple innovation.
Quote:
Dell 24" IPS = $539. Apple 24" IPS = $900.
Dell sell a 27" IPS for $1100. Using the price difference from the 24", Apple's could be $1460. Apple sell a 27" iMac for $1700. So you just buy the 27" iMac and you get a spare computer thrown in to use if your other one breaks. The original 30" was over $3k. If they can get the USB ports and maybe FW800 to work over a mini-dp aux connection, even better.
Focusing on cost at this stage makes no sense. If you go down to your local appliance store there are all sorts of HDTVs for sale. Unless your need is the absolute lowest price you buy based on what your need are.
Quote:
They aren't all that pricey relatively. The i7-980x is more expensive than the lower-end Xeons. The Xeons work in dual processor configs too unlike the desktop chips. If the Mac Pro update is imminent and they do in fact use the Xeons, it's a bit odd that they haven't updated earlier. The processors have been out for 4 months now or something like that.
When looking at the Pro dont forget to factor in the cost of the buffered memory.
It is true that new processors have been out for awhile now but that is likely not what they are waiting on. If the machines are due soon there is no sense soeculating on what the hold up was. Instead we can simply wait for the real iron to make itself available.
In any event i think people need to relax here. Have a little faith that Apple is overhauling the hardware and is doing it right.
Quote:
USB 3 is a must but I don't think that would have delayed the release.
Wether you like USB 3 or not the fact is it has not been ready for some time. It hasnt been in Intels chipsets for one, for another the various descreet chips all had issues. I'm not sure where the "it must have USB3 mantra" comes from. Certainly it would be nice but on the otherhand it shouldn't be implement at a high expense.
Quote:
The final product will likely answer a lot of questions but I will reiterate that if all they do this time round is drop in the expected 3600/5600 Xeons and do nothing else then it will be a pretty disappointing update because besides doing nothing, it's pretty much the least effort they could expend on that lineup.
And whom is indicating that this will be the type of upgrade Mac Pro will get? If anything the long wait is more likely an indication of a major overhaul.
To the contrary I'm expecting far more than a processor bump. This due to the convergence of many little elements that lead me to be hopeful.
Again it really doesn't look that bad. Im not sure what your problem is. The Mac Pro doesn't suport the volume to justify updates like are seen in the consummer lineup. It isn't even marketed to people with the need for the latest and greatest. Rather it is a stable platform for serious work thus the "Pro" name.
Comments
i was hoping the refresh would have light peak.
I have seen no evidence that LightPeak is anywhere near ready fort production.
Apple usually isn?t the first to adopt a technology, but they are the first to adopt it across their product line. There isn?t even anything that could use it at this point*.
* Before you or someone else mentions that it?s protocol independent note that while that is true it?s still optical and pretty much every protocol and device you are thinking of is connected via cooper which makes a very, very expensive convertor box? which also doesn?t yet exist.
USB 3 is a must but I don't think that would have delayed the release. The final product will likely answer a lot of questions but I will reiterate that if all they do this time round is drop in the expected 3600/5600 Xeons and do nothing else then it will be a pretty disappointing update because besides doing nothing, it's pretty much the least effort they could expend on that lineup.
I wonder. Apple doesn?t like to do a ?simple? update mid cycle to add something that would necessary like USB3.0. It would likely have to come to Macs then their iDevices, and the larger, more powerful and more expensive Macs would likely be the first to get these, IMO, so I can see them holding back on an update if something wasn?t quite right with a product they don?t update more than once a year.
Nice to see Apple remembering that they make Macs, too.
Nice to see Apple remembering that they make Macs, too.
Note Apple just reported a record number of Mac sales in a quarter with an all new MacBook, MacBook Pros and a redesigned Mac Mini. All note that they are resopsonsible for 1/3 of the retail profit of PC sales. I have to think they haven't forgotten the Mac or its potential.
They sure haven't forgotten the profits from the Mac line. Or how to screw a 2 year old cpu eg in the iMac like. See Core 2 Duo for details.
But the Mac Pro IS a forgotten machine. With an outrageous sticker price for a 'mere' quad core starting at an eye watering £2k for a 'workstation' with 'old tech' when it was introduced consumer GPU with laughable ram and HD. How can the flagship Mac computer not have an update in a year and a half? Truly pathetic.
If that isn't 'forgotten'...I don't know what is. Not to mention the 'distant memories' of some kind of display range to accompany it.
The current Mac 'pro' is a goddamn joke. Overpriced. Under-powered. Out of date.
In short, nothing short of an absolute disgrace.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Lemon Bon Bon.
*snip rant*
Yes Lemon, we know. It's been 4 days, you couldn't contain your Mac Pro rage The processors in the Mac Pro were definitely top end upon release, the only thing that was poor was the video card options. Currently it is certainly behind the times, no one is arguing that with you. I think you can let go of the anger tho buddy, it's being updated very soon if these reports are right. We'll see exactly how up to date it becomes.
says you. They could definitely stand to slim that thing down in a few areas. .
Yes, it definitely needs a new case but I actually kind of like the big metal case. I mainly just want them to come up with a new look. They seem to have been incorporating the black in with the metal in their other hardware maybe that is what they will do.
Spoken like a true zealot.
They sure haven't forgotten the profits from the Mac line. Or how to screw a 2 year old cpu eg in the iMac like. See Core 2 Duo for details.
But the Mac Pro IS a forgotten machine. With an outrageous sticker price for a 'mere' quad core starting at an eye watering £2k for a 'workstation' with 'old tech' when it was introduced consumer GPU with laughable ram and HD. How can the flagship Mac computer not have an update in a year and a half? Truly pathetic.
If that isn't 'forgotten'...I don't know what is. Not to mention the 'distant memories' of some kind of display range to accompany it.
The current Mac 'pro' is a goddamn joke. Overpriced. Under-powered. Out of date.
In short, nothing short of an absolute disgrace.
Lemon Bon Bon.
I fully agree with Lemon here.
At work we have been waiting fot quite some time to buy new Mac Pro's.
I don't want to buy the current ones because of the reasons stated above (same price as when introduced over a year ago, now old graphics card etc.) and in this case there is no discussion that one feels a bit ?locked? having just Apple as the hardware vendor. Or I guess that would be fine if the updates was more frequent and more in pace with the rest of the industry. I'd also be happy to see a little more hardware options, (not that it should be overwhelming like with Dell and such).
Spoken like a true zealot.
They sure haven't forgotten the profits from the Mac line. Or how to screw a 2 year old cpu eg in the iMac like. See Core 2 Duo for details.
But the Mac Pro IS a forgotten machine. With an outrageous sticker price for a 'mere' quad core starting at an eye watering £2k for a 'workstation' with 'old tech' when it was introduced consumer GPU with laughable ram and HD. How can the flagship Mac computer not have an update in a year and a half? Truly pathetic.
If that isn't 'forgotten'...I don't know what is. Not to mention the 'distant memories' of some kind of display range to accompany it.
The current Mac 'pro' is a goddamn joke. Overpriced. Under-powered. Out of date.
In short, nothing short of an absolute disgrace.
Are you referring to me and my reply to a comment that specified Macs as a whole, not the single model type you specified in your comment? If so, note that I?ve already made a sarcastic remark about the long delay between Mac Pro releases in this thread and have made many mentions over the years to the weakening focus on non-consumer based Apple products, but that doesn?t change the fact that Apple is focused on Macs do to the money they are making and money they can make from them for the foreseeable future.
...The only items in my office are the iMac on my desk, a Brother wireless printer on my credenza and in the closet is a 1' stack of copy paper....nothing else!
I have nothing in my desk draws except one red felt-tip pen....
Where's the Flickr photo set so we can see??
I love the Apple TV screen saver with the photos floating up the screen. I have it pulling from my Flickr.
Let's hope that this means there will be a refresh soon!!!
Exactly.
Maybe supplies of current models will start dwindling soon and become harder to find. This usually indicates a refresh is coming.
About damn time!!!!!!
They're upgrading the Mac Pro? Whats the matter, did they run out of iOS devices to sell?
Nice to see Apple remembering that they make Macs, too.
Is it true you can build one now that gets about the same performance for a fraction of the price? I also thought I read that there is a new script or something that allows you to install updates without having to worry. Can anyone confirm or deny from that osx86 group. Strange how apple leaves them alone. Why server CPU if you can do without that and ECC memory, besides price. Trying to understand as it seems a lot of do it yourselfers swear by it.
Just curious. Peace out.
says you. They could definitely stand to slim that thing down in a few areas. It weighs like 100lbs and it has 4 spoilers... you know... for keeping it on the ground?
If you allow for the idea that the Pro serves a purpose then you will realize what Apple needs is another product to fill the role of a desktop Mac.
Yea, it's totally top heavy. It's truly tower and most of it is hollow space for airflow.
Actually all that space does not assure air flow. If you have hot spots you have to design the machine to provide that air flow. One of the worst things about the old ATX PCs is that many where built by people with zero concern about air flow. Thus a wide range of reliability problems.
So what you have is a giant metal wind tunnel. How about instead of the massive super heavy tower, they make something where you swap out the components just as easily, only with half the metal (smaller shipping footprint and materials cost), and naturally the better performance that you'd get from an internals upgrade.
It may be coming if any of the patent applications are to be believed. In a nut shell you are asking for what many of us call an XMac.
I don't know how the newest AMD chips compare to the intel chips in regards to performance, but they have way more cores.
AMD isn't as bad as many imply. They trail Intel somewhat in performance. As you note though more cores so in some cases AMD can be a big win.
The real play with AMD will come "real soon now". That would be the combo of Fusion and Bulldozer. Fusion would be almost perfect for the Mini and ought to out perform the current Intel implementation.
The real question is how tied to Intel is Apple? Will the introduce a sub par machine based on the coming Intel hardware instead of the Fusion hardware?
Dave
You'll get a real GPU, only it will be a few generations behind what is available for PC's, 30+% dearer and the drivers will be crap so whatever they are they'll perform like PC GPU cards from 2008.
The Nvidians are gatthering a wide arsenal to rule....
With respect to neglecting the Mac, I think Apple may have a tick-tock strategy. They work on the portable devices until they are at the cutting edge of tech and not much more they can do for a while, then they move to the Mac and innovate there, and then back to the portables and so on. Cross-polinating all the time.
I know portable devices are the new hotness, but lots of people still need/use computers, and it can make a big difference to many people's lives making better computers. The spread of Unix on the desktop also helps the nation's security I think, from foreign hackers.
The Mac Pro on the other hand has never been the type of product Apple has updated frequently. The update free stretch on the current model isnt that far out of the ordinary. So why the whine?
Actually it is out of the ordinary. If you look at MacRumors Buyer's Guide it is the longest time without update since their records started, in 2002.
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Mac_Pro
Dodeca-cores? What are we trying to do by producing these monsters? These machines are already many thousand times faster than the simulator for the first atomic bomb.
Hope "THEY" don't get their hands on a few of these. After all, how much processing power does one need to be productive at work place or at home.
Save time.
I wonder if they'll bother building a 27". The amount of sales that model will generate is bound to be so low that the price would be high enough for them to be as well making the 27" iMac take a video input. Which they have done.
The attractiveness of the monitor depends upon it feature set. For example a HMDI interface make the monitor much more useful. If that HMDI input is capable of scaling the 1080p signal to the monitors native resolution then all the better. The monitors value istied to features, usable features, and hopefully a little Apple innovation.
Dell 24" IPS = $539. Apple 24" IPS = $900.
Dell sell a 27" IPS for $1100. Using the price difference from the 24", Apple's could be $1460. Apple sell a 27" iMac for $1700. So you just buy the 27" iMac and you get a spare computer thrown in to use if your other one breaks. The original 30" was over $3k. If they can get the USB ports and maybe FW800 to work over a mini-dp aux connection, even better.
Focusing on cost at this stage makes no sense. If you go down to your local appliance store there are all sorts of HDTVs for sale. Unless your need is the absolute lowest price you buy based on what your need are.
They aren't all that pricey relatively. The i7-980x is more expensive than the lower-end Xeons. The Xeons work in dual processor configs too unlike the desktop chips. If the Mac Pro update is imminent and they do in fact use the Xeons, it's a bit odd that they haven't updated earlier. The processors have been out for 4 months now or something like that.
When looking at the Pro dont forget to factor in the cost of the buffered memory.
It is true that new processors have been out for awhile now but that is likely not what they are waiting on. If the machines are due soon there is no sense soeculating on what the hold up was. Instead we can simply wait for the real iron to make itself available.
In any event i think people need to relax here. Have a little faith that Apple is overhauling the hardware and is doing it right.
USB 3 is a must but I don't think that would have delayed the release.
Wether you like USB 3 or not the fact is it has not been ready for some time. It hasnt been in Intels chipsets for one, for another the various descreet chips all had issues. I'm not sure where the "it must have USB3 mantra" comes from. Certainly it would be nice but on the otherhand it shouldn't be implement at a high expense.
The final product will likely answer a lot of questions but I will reiterate that if all they do this time round is drop in the expected 3600/5600 Xeons and do nothing else then it will be a pretty disappointing update because besides doing nothing, it's pretty much the least effort they could expend on that lineup.
And whom is indicating that this will be the type of upgrade Mac Pro will get? If anything the long wait is more likely an indication of a major overhaul.
To the contrary I'm expecting far more than a processor bump. This due to the convergence of many little elements that lead me to be hopeful.
Dave
Actually it is out of the ordinary. If you look at MacRumors Buyer's Guide it is the longest time without update since their records started, in 2002.
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Mac_Pro
Again it really doesn't look that bad. Im not sure what your problem is. The Mac Pro doesn't suport the volume to justify updates like are seen in the consummer lineup. It isn't even marketed to people with the need for the latest and greatest. Rather it is a stable platform for serious work thus the "Pro" name.
Dave