My theory is that the new Mac Pro will not be a low volume machine. AFAICT it will be the most powerful off-the-shelf solution available to: researchers, 3D Modelers, scientists, creatives, video editors, sound editors, medical/imaging, gamers, etc. It is the only high-end machine that can run [supported] Windows, Linux, Unix, Mac OS X -- singly, or in any combination.
That entire market is small at this price range though and those people don't all need to use a Mac Pro. Workstation sales worldwide across every manufacturer are around 1 million units per quarter and Apple can't take all of it because a lot of the others start their workstation prices at $1000. The best case would be to reach HP at about 40% marketshare but that would require HP to lose their share and even then it's still only 1/3 of the iMac sales.
It doesn't have to be a high volume market. The higher-end models in any lineup from any manufacturer typically aren't the highest volume sellers.
Significant, is that each frame is 45 MBytes, and at 25 frames per second thats 1.1 GBytes per second.12 TBytes of source video is processed to produce an hour video of 4T Bytes of output. Special effects often are done at 60 or 120 fps -- greatly increasing processing/storage requirements.
1GB/s means you get 16 minutes of footage on a $1000 1TB SSD or over 5.5TB ($5500) for a 90 minute movie so prices would really need to come down but uncompressed wouldn't be necessary for long sequences so the 1.25GB/s speed of Apple's PCIe SSD will be useful for shorter media. It only goes up to 1TB so far but I wonder if the Mac Pro will get a larger option. Either way, bulk storage has to go outside and that's for the best as it means it's far easier to buy new machines.
Now here's an unexpected incident: My granddaughter was fooling around with my iPhone 5S - taking SloMo videos: 1280x720 at 120 fps. I imported one of these videos into FCPX -- it was 14 seconds long (60 fps) and 29 seconds long when conformed to 120 fps. What surprised me was that my very capable iMac really struggled to import, optimize and render this relatively minor clip. It wasn't red-lined, but there was obviously some problem processing 720P at 120 fps???
Maybe try converting to 120fps ProRes in Quicktime Pro and then import that to FCPX. The video quality looks nice on the 5S as well as the photos. Here's a video shot on a 5S:
Back on point. I have put off replacing the 2011 iMac 27" with a newer model pending the announcement and pricing of the new Mac Pro.
To my mind, $5,000 - $6,000 for a Mac Pro would greatly increase my processing capability at an acceptable cost -- and provide better future-proofing (upgrade capability) to boot.
It might not use all the cores fully on the top-end model:
what's a few thousand dollars to realize your creative potential
It can be quite a lot if you realize you don't have any creative potential. But even then, it's not an expense as it retains its resale value. You aren't really losing a few thousand, same as you don't really lose what you spend on a house. Rather than it sitting in the bank, it is taking the form of a product you can do something with.
That entire market is small at this price range though and those people don't all need to use a Mac Pro.
Plus not everyone is going to rush out to get the latest Mac Pro. Many will just use their current one and check online what they can buy after their current one dies.
Maybe try converting to 120fps ProRes in Quicktime Pro and then import that to FCPX. The video quality looks nice on the 5S as well as the photos. Here's a video shot on a 5S:
Really cool these slow-mo videos popping up on the net. I like this one as well:
Back on point. I have put off replacing the 2011 iMac 27" with a newer model pending the announcement and pricing of the new Mac Pro.
To my mind, $5,000 - $6,000 for a Mac Pro would greatly increase my processing capability at an acceptable cost -- and provide better future-proofing (upgrade capability) to boot.
Future proofing as in storage and screen is external I take it. Well, that certainly is a good way to look at it. I presume one is able to use their iMac screen for their new MP?
Because they want 80% of PC profits and because these products would be of value to consumers.
It's what many consumers want and need. Apple cares about that.
You release a cheap Mac, margins would be lower. Not only that, people willing to buy the $1200 iMac will then buy the cheap Mac instead thus you lose a sale at the higher end. Soon more people will buy the cheap Mac and you eat your sales at the higher end and possibly eat the iPad sales. Thus lower margins and lower profit.
Those stats are actually quite surprising. Where I work we just replaced all the laptops with macbook airs.
Within a week everyone had given up with osx and had win 8 installed instead. Seems iOS lovers don't necessarily translate to mac lovers. Everyone does seem to love the hardware though.
Maybe Apple should consider abandoning OSX and work out a way to put iOS on a desktop.
Now here's an unexpected incident: My granddaughter was fooling around with my iPhone 5S - taking SloMo videos: 1280x720 at 120 fps. I imported one of these videos into FCPX -- it was 14 seconds long (60 fps) and 29 seconds long when conformed to 120 fps. What surprised me was that my very capable iMac really struggled to import, optimize and render this relatively minor clip. It wasn't red-lined, but there was obviously some problem processing 720P at 120 fps???
Just to follow up on the above... It seems the problem causing FCPX import to struggle was unrelated to the iPhone 5S, the 120 fps SloMo footage, the Mac OS or the iMac. The problem is caused when the [event target] Promise Pegasus RAID's space gets low during import.
When available space gets around 1.5 GB, the Pegasus slows down significantly -- even though there is enough space to complete the import.
That entire market is small at this price range though and those people don't all need to use a Mac Pro.
Plus not everyone is going to rush out to get the latest Mac Pro. Many will just use their current one and check online what they can buy after their current one dies.
AFAICT, there is a lot of pent up demand for a new, faster Mac Pro from the current Mac Pro users. I suspect some will be dissatisfied that they can't use their existing hardware components in the new model.
In answer to @Marvin, I suggested that the new Mac Pro may attract new [to the Mac or to the Mac Pro] users that are topping out on their iMacs or Windows or Linux machines.
Maybe try converting to 120fps ProRes in Quicktime Pro and then import that to FCPX. The video quality looks nice on the 5S as well as the photos. Here's a video shot on a 5S:
Really cool these slow-mo videos popping up on the net. I like this one as well:
I posted an update to my conversion problems -- my RAID was running out of space and that slowed everything down. Turns out, when space is available, FCPX handles the import with ease -- much faster than transferring the SloMo file to the mac then exporting in QT:
1) Connect the iPhone to the Mac
2) With FCPX, import 120 fps to a FCPX Event (Trans code optional) -- the 120 fps clips are rendered/played in the event as 60 fps (realtime)
3) When you include the clip in a timeline you can play at realtime 60 fps, or 1-click conform to SloMo at 120 fps -- or manually retime from anything 1,000 times slower or faster
Back on point. I have put off replacing the 2011 iMac 27" with a newer model pending the announcement and pricing of the new Mac Pro.
To my mind, $5,000 - $6,000 for a Mac Pro would greatly increase my processing capability at an acceptable cost -- and provide better future-proofing (upgrade capability) to boot.
Future proofing as in storage and screen is external I take it. Well, that certainly is a good way to look at it. I presume one is able to use their iMac screen for their new MP?
The only expandable Macs I ever owned were a Mac II (circa 1987) and the Developer Intal Mac which had the current Mac Pro form factor. The latter was a real beast -- a floor top rather than a desktop computer. But, even with all the room inside, "expansion" was rather limited -- few PCI cards and a few additional disks. At the time I was using PPC iMacs and had about 1.5 TB of external FireWire LaCie HDDs. Couldn't match that with internal drives on a Mac Pro.
So yes, I applaud Apple for designing the new Mac Pro for relatively unlimited external expansion as opposed to limited internal expansion.
Sigh, as you know, I can't use the iMac screen as an external monitor. I have a 24" iMac with a bad internal drive -- that I boot from a 2TB LaCie FireWire 800 drive. But I've always wanted the option to use an iMac as an additional display. They have FW Target Disk Mode -- why not Target Display Mode.
what's a few thousand dollars to realize your creative potential
It can be quite a lot if you realize you don't have any creative potential.
LOL!
The point I was attempting to make is that Apple has dramatically lowered the entry fee for video editing to on tenth of what was 13 years ago. It is now affordable to millions who couldn't even think about it last decade.
In 2000, a pro-quality video editing seat was as inaccessible as a maimframe computer in its heyday.
Today, if you have access to a Mac, and $400-$500 you can experiment with pro-quality video editing -- and see if it works for you... With the proliferation of videos on the web I think it works for many.
If being the most powerful company in the world is being held back...then what the hell does that make every other company?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad
Intel does decrease prices from time to time as yields improve, but you're right that all OEMs have access to those price adjustments.
Apple issued speed bumps earlier this year to the MacBook Pro from 2.3GHz to 2.4GHz and 2.6GHz to 2.7GHz when Intel made the faster chips available at the same price that the slower ones had previously been. It's safe to assume that Apple did this because MacBook Pro customers are important to them.
Today the 2.6GHz i7-3720QM and 2.7GHz i7-3740QM both cost exactly the same amount and that price is identical to what customers previously paid for the 2.3GHz 3610QM yet the Mac mini continues to carry the older, slower CPU. It's safe to assume that Apple doesn't worry about giving Mac mini customers the best possible bang for their buck.
The 3610QM no longer appears on the Intel price list so it's not known whether customers with long term supply agreements for the older chip are getting a discount or not.
FYI the Core i7 4800MQ is priced identically to the 3740QM so it's pretty safe to assume that it will be the CPU in the late 2013 Retina MacBook Pro.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xZu
Funny observation, if you use a hackintosh you can really observe just how powerful, elegant and joy to use OSX is on the same hardware as Windows, it is amazing, if only Apple would make some decent hardware for it to run on.
Ouote:
Originally Posted by runbuh
"Don't forget the business side of the equation: What business wants to support an OS X device when the device can't access the systems that the business uses? Cisco support for VoIP clients on OS X? No feature parity with Windows. Cisco/Juniper VPN support (especially client inspection)? Sucks. 802.1X/NAC for OS X? Always an also ran to Windows (try doing machine and user auth with certificates in OS X). The ability to remotely manage the system, control software deployments, apply policies, etc.? Always an also ran to Windows, especially with 3rd party support. Has DISA even issued a STIG for Lion, much less Mountain Lion? No.
"Windows has the marketshare, which means the vendors provide better/faster support for Windows, which sells more Windows machines, which keeps their marketshare up, etc." End quote.
Apple holds back tech updates for a long time. Look at the Mini. It is the bastard step child in the Mac line. They keep old chips around longer than their competition.
Apple does innovate There is no doubt about it. They just don't spread the love to all of their line.
Their obsession with design is stupid. It shouldn't overshadow the purpose of their devices. This is probably a reason they won't build a small tower with more power than a Mini. The iMacs are like anorexic fashion models. They look good on the outside, cost a lot, but you wouldn't get one to help you build a house (Enterprise). What's up with the 5400 rpm drives?
Optical drives are still useful for consumers. Since Apple obviously isn't going for enterprise sales by not making their software compatible with important enterprise applications, why the hell drop optical drives?
Blu-Ray is a market that will be around for a while. If you want proof go to Walmart. They only sell things that people buy. They have a Blu-Ray section. I'm not saying they should be added to iMacs. It is just an observation that they are still a wanted product.
Years ago I believed Apple products were not priced too high. I am typing this on my Mac Book. Now I do believe they are because of their slow adoption of the best chips and the dropping of features. Now that I actually prefer GNU/Linux I'm comparing hardware. OSX is better than Windows but it isn't better than several Linux distributions.
My next machine will probably be a Chromebook. I will dual boot it. It has what I want without the gigantic price of a Mac Book Air. The video performance of low end chips is now good enough to do what I need. I realized I don't need an i7. The DDR3 speeds and 4 GB of RAM will do what I need, which is streaming videos and listening to music in a portable device capable of being connected to an external monitor with HDMI.
Far more people want a low end functional machine than a $1000 buy in price for a laptop. If Apple wants to ignore such a gigantic market it is fine with me. I don't own Apple stock.
The writing is on the wall. Apple will kill the Mac line. They just haven't realized it yet, or they have and won't admit it publicly. If they refuse to update their high quality/over priced/under spec'd products at a pace equal to or faster than their lower priced competition, and refuse to enter the lower end market, their computer division will eventually shrink and die.
Low price doesn't always mean low quality. Apple could build a mid-range computer for the masses and win if they would lower their margin. The Mac Mini for $349 with its current base model would be a great start. Just make the case out of pressed steel instead of blocks of aluminum. Add a CD ROM drive to boot. It would be a winner.
The iPod Touch is a device I want to own. I just think it is overpriced by $200 for the 64 GB model. I can get a great Android phone with that much storage and a bigger screen for much less on a phone contract that I use anyway. Where is the compelling reason to buy one? It certainly isn't price or features. IOS is their new bread and butter. They just need to remember that some innovation from somewhere else might quickly kill them just like the iPhone killed RIM and their Blackberry.
Those stats are actually quite surprising. Where I work we just replaced all the laptops with macbook airs.
Within a week everyone had given up with osx and had win 8 installed instead. Seems iOS lovers don't necessarily translate to mac lovers. Everyone does seem to love the hardware though.
Maybe Apple should consider abandoning OSX and work out a way to put iOS on a desktop.
People hate change. There are some windows only programs so there probably was a need for win8. Apple already sold the hardware.
My next machine will probably be a Chromebook. I will dual boot it. It has what I want without the gigantic price of a Mac Book Air. The video performance of low end chips is now good enough to do what I need. I realized I don't need an i7. The DDR3 speeds and 4 GB of RAM will do what I need, which is streaming videos and listening to music in a portable device capable of being connected to an external monitor with HDMI.
Far more people want a low end functional machine than a $1000 buy in price for a laptop. If Apple wants to ignore such a gigantic market it is fine with me. I don't own Apple stock.
Good luck with the chrome book. I hope you're always connected to the internet
Apple doesn't need the low end market. It does fine with the highend market (45% profit share).
Good luck with the chrome book. I hope you're always connected to the internet
Apple doesn't need the low end market. It does fine with the highend market (45% profit share).
Chrome OS now has features that work offline. Even so, the dual boot with a GNU/Linux OS will make it just fine for offline work. If I get the new Acer I'll be up and running for $249 plus the additional price of an SD card to increase the storage capacity to a total of 80 GB. With multiple SD cards I won't have any storage problems ever. I intend to divide the original 16 GB SSD equally between Chrome and GNU/Linux. Windows is totally out of the picture for me. YAY!
What if Apple could capture a much larger percentage of the home PC market by making one low cost desktop and one low cost laptop? Do you think their high end customers would stop buying the expensive Macs? I don't think so. Already people are buying the expensive Macs even though the overpriced Mini has been around for many years.
Apple now has the iPhone 5c yet the 5s is selling so well it is back-ordered for 2-3 weeks. Apple is learning a lesson because of this. Perhaps they will extend this to the computer market if they really intend to continue in it long term. Maybe they will create low cost A7 computers that run iOS a la Google's new Android powered laptops. In theory it sounds good but they already charge a fortune for the 64 GB iPod Touch. Until they rethink their profit structure for entry level devices it won't happen.
No, they wait till there is something worthwhile to put in their hardware
Look at the Mini. It is the bastard step child in the Mac line. They keep old chips around longer than their competition.
And people love it, gets bought by the batch. Enterprise stuff, this Mini.
Apple does innovate There is no doubt about it. They just don't spread the love to all of their line.
I think Apple is the only company spreading their love across all their products. Heck, even the inside of their computers used to get a signature because they were so proud of what they created.
Their obsession with design is stupid. It shouldn't overshadow the purpose of their devices.
It doesn't. As a matter of fact, it complements its purpose.
This is probably a reason they won't build a small tower with more power than a Mini.
The iMacs are like anorexic fashion models. They look good on the outside, cost a lot, but you wouldn't get one to help you build a house (Enterprise). What's up with the 5400 rpm drives?
Wow.
1) never seen a person suffering from anorexia who looked good to me
2) iMacs cost a lot?
3) 'build a house' ??
4) 5400 drives? Choice; isn't that what 'people like you' want?
Optical drives are still useful for consumers. Since Apple obviously isn't going for enterprise sales by not making their software compatible with important enterprise applications, why the hell drop optical drives?
They'r not in the enterprise software business. And ODD are a no-no in enterprises. Many disable the USB ports as well.
Blu-Ray is a market that will be around for a while. If you want proof go to Walmart. They only sell things that people buy. They have a Blu-Ray section. I'm not saying they should be added to iMacs. It is just an observation that they are still a wanted product.
So buy external, or get a MP and pop one in, while you still can.
Years ago I believed Apple products were not priced too high.
They never changed this. We now simply get more bang for the same buck, but that's just the evolution in IT.
I am typing this on my Mac Book. Now I do believe they are because of their slow adoption of the best chips and the dropping of features. Now that I actually prefer GNU/Linux I'm comparing hardware. OSX is better than Windows but it isn't better than several Linux distributions.
Preferring Linux makes it possible for you to get a cheaper HW solution. Build it yourself, or get a Dell or whatever.
My next machine will probably be a Chromebook.
That's quite an investment! $1299 with 4GB RAM and 32GB SSD. Sounds more expensive than something mobile from Apple.
I will dual boot it. It has what I want without the gigantic price of a Mac Book Air. The video performance of low end chips is now good enough to do what I need. I realized I don't need an i7. The DDR3 speeds and 4 GB of RAM will do what I need, which is streaming videos and listening to music in a portable device capable of being connected to an external monitor with HDMI.
I'm starting to give up on you...
Far more people want a low end functional machine than a $1000 buy in price for a laptop. If Apple wants to ignore such a gigantic market it is fine with me. I don't own Apple stock.
Sales figures say otherwise. You should look stuff up before posting.
The writing is on the wall. Apple will kill the Mac line. They just haven't realized it yet, or they have and won't admit it publicly.
There are vacancies for people like you at Apple Inc.
If they refuse to update their high quality/over priced/under spec'd products at a pace equal to or faster than their lower priced competition, and
You call that competition? I call them incompetent!
... refuse to enter the lower end market...
By giving us the Mini for 500 bucks, some 8 years ago.
their computer division will eventually shrink and die.
Not as fast as their 'competition'
Low price doesn't always mean low quality.
Good point, although you do get what you pay for.
Apple could build a mid-range computer for the masses and win if they would lower their margin. The Mac Mini for $349 with its current base model would be a great start. Just make the case out of pressed steel instead of blocks of aluminum. Add a CD ROM drive to boot. It would be a winner.
Please, no. They'd get 'people like you' as their new customers, and we wouldn't want to have to deal with, well, posts like this one. Or people agreeing to it.
The iPod Touch is a device I want to own. I just think it is overpriced by $200 for the 64 GB model. I can get a great Android phone with that much storage and a bigger screen for much less on a phone contract that I use anyway. Where is the compelling reason to buy one? It certainly isn't price or features. IOS is their new bread and butter. They just need to remember that some innovation from somewhere else might quickly kill them just like the iPhone killed RIM and their Blackberry.
Thanks for showing me being incapable of responding to this; I simply couldn't ever explain to you why you are so wrong, and on so many levels.
Today, if you have access to a Mac, and $400-$500 you can experiment with pro-quality video editing -- and see if it works for you... With the proliferation of videos on the web I think it works for many.
One might argue that the development you describe has had the same affect on video that the previous decade had on independent music production. Prior to the Great Democratization, those who could not attract the attention of financiers had no hope of realizing their vision. Now, anybody can produce and distribute their garbage no matter how bad it is!
At least "cost of entry" provided some degree of shit filtering.
And people love it, gets bought by the batch. Enterprise stuff, this Mini.
Not arguing for or against the post to which you reply, but for the record, I have need for a mini at the moment and am delaying the purchase until it is updated with current internals. To me it DOES seem like Haswell/Iris is the kind of thing that should have been included by now. The only possible explanations for delaying it are being able to make a fuss by claiming that using something other than a two-year-old CPU qualifies it to claim to be a "new model," or Crazy Jony has a new look he wants to try out and everyone has to make do with dated equipment until he has a chance to get around to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
4) 5400 drives? Choice; isn't that what 'people like you' want?
I don't understand. Are you saying that 5400 rpm drives are anything less than ridiculous in any computer than costs more than $399?
To those of us who feel Jony Ive may be losing the plot, those drives are what we call "evidence." The lust for an unnecessarily thin iMac resulted in a computer that dissipates heat poorly, precluding the use of higher-performance drives because they get too hot. He sacrificed the very tangible benefit of higher speed in order to achieve a look. That's the very definition of "form over function" and is the kind of thinking that drives fashion, not technology.
Then buy one. It really is that simple. There is nothing 'wrong' with the current model, and if you need one, well, get it.
at the moment and am delaying the purchase until it is updated with current internals.
Ok, so you need one, but not now. Then wait. But make no mistake on how long this might take, for whatever reason, and do not even think it has anything to do with something new Apple is waiting on to hit the market. Because that is by no means any reason for them to wait.
Are you saying that 5400 rpm drives are anything less than ridiculous in any computer than costs more than $399?
I'm saying I wouldn't buy a PC with a HDD in it, but that's my preference. Other are perfectly fine with old tech, be it mechanically spinning discs, rotating at lower speeds of 5400rpm.
The lust for an unnecessarily thin iMac resulted in a computer that dissipates heat poorly, precluding the use of higher-performance drives because they get too hot. He sacrificed the very tangible benefit of higher speed in order to achieve a look. That's the very definition of "form over function" and is the kind of thinking that drives fashion, not technology.
I haven't been reading up on tech, only Apple rumors. Are the new iMacs having problems? Or are they mostly being sold with SSD anyways therefore making this possible point moot? I don't know, but I wouldn't expect Apple to release a product that is having problems, HW-wise.
This is probably a reason they won't build a small tower with more power than a Mini.
No, they won’t do that because Apple isn’t in the business of making worthless junk.
Optical drives are still useful for consumers.
Not Apple’s consumers. Get over it.
Blu-Ray is a market that will be around for a while. If you want proof go to Walmart. They only sell things that people buy. They have a Blu-Ray section. I'm not saying they should be added to iMacs. It is just an observation that they are still a wanted product.
Not by Apple’s customers.
Apple will kill the Mac line.
Duh. This wasn’t obvious? Eventually we won’t be using mice and physical keyboards. When that happens, it won’t be a Mac that you buy, just as we aren’t currently buying Apple XCVIIIs.
They just haven’t realized it yet…
Please. It’s Apple.
If they refuse to update their high quality/over priced/under spec'd products at a pace equal to or faster than their lower priced competition, and refuse to enter the lower end market, their computer division will eventually shrink and die.
Not really, no, since sales of the aforementioned (horribly defined, by you) products have only increased compared to the “properly priced”, “over spec’d” trash from everyone else.
Low price doesn't always mean low quality.
But in the case of every PC, it does.
Apple could build a mid-range computer for the masses and win if they would lower their margin.
You know nothing about Apple.
The Mac Mini for $349 with its current base model would be a great start.
It’d be great if they could get the Mini back down to $499 like the G4 model was. Other than that, no, they don’t need to compromise to create crap.
Just make the case out of pressed steel instead of blocks of aluminum. Add a CD ROM drive to boot. It would be a winner.
Funny, I didn’t know “utter failure” was spelled with six letters.
The iPod Touch is a device I want to own. I just think it is overpriced by $200 for the 64 GB model. I can get a great Android phone with that much storage and a bigger screen for much less on a phone contract that I use anyway.
Yep, a $2,400 phone costs less than an iPod touch. Oh, and is meant for the same market, by the way.
Where is the compelling reason to buy one? It certainly isn't price or features.
It certainly isn’t possible that you just can’t think of one because you have no use for a PMP and can’t comprehend anyone’s wishes but your own¡
They just need to remember that some innovation from somewhere else might quickly kill them just like the iPhone killed RIM and their Blackberry.
When was the last time anyone in the industry but Apple did ANY innovation?
What if Apple could capture a much larger percentage of the home PC market by making one low cost desktop and one low cost laptop? Do you think their high end customers would stop buying the expensive Macs? I don't think so. Already people are buying the expensive Macs even though the overpriced Mini has been around for many years.
Apple is happy with the $1000+ market. They also have something like 45% profit share. They don't do cheap.
Ok, so you need one, but not now. Then wait. But make no mistake on how long this might take, for whatever reason, and do not even think it has anything to do with something new Apple is waiting on to hit the market. Because that is by no means any reason for them to wait.
So, your point is that Apple really doesn't give Shit One what their customers want or expect, they will just do whatever the hell they want whenever they want and if we don't like it we can just suck it? High praise. Gee, why would I ever consider another vendor?
I haven't been reading up on tech, only Apple rumors. Are the new iMacs having problems? Or are they mostly being sold with SSD anyways therefore making this possible point moot?
Seriously? C'mon Phil, now you're being disingenuous. If Ford built a car with a choice of engines, the least expensive of which would overheat, would you defend Ford by arguing that most people buy the more expensive engine so it doesn't really matter? Of course not.
I don't know how many HHDs vs. Fusion they sold BEFORE THE SSD WAS EVEN AVAILABLE, but it doesn't affect MY POINT which was that the design puts form before function.
This is probably a reason they won't build a small tower with more power than a Mini.
No, they won’t do that because Apple isn’t in the business of making worthless junk.
What would make a small tower "worthless junk?" I can think of all kinds of ways that a "Mac Medium" could open up a whole new market. It may not be a market Apple wants, like large-screen notebooks, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Originally Posted by Smallwheels
Optical drives are still useful for consumers.
Not Apple’s consumers. Get over it.
That's a ridiculous remark. The only reason Apple's consumers don't consume optical drives is because they CAN'T.
YOU may not see a need, but lots of people still prefer to consume media via physical disc, and there are still really good reasons for them to do so. Get over it. Why do you get your panties bunched up over that?
Comments
The majority of people may not care, but Apple does. Why should Apple cater to them? They make 45% of the PC profits and own 90% of the $1000+ market.
Because they want 80% of PC profits and because these products would be of value to consumers.
It's what many consumers want and need. Apple cares about that.
That entire market is small at this price range though and those people don't all need to use a Mac Pro. Workstation sales worldwide across every manufacturer are around 1 million units per quarter and Apple can't take all of it because a lot of the others start their workstation prices at $1000. The best case would be to reach HP at about 40% marketshare but that would require HP to lose their share and even then it's still only 1/3 of the iMac sales.
It doesn't have to be a high volume market. The higher-end models in any lineup from any manufacturer typically aren't the highest volume sellers.
1GB/s means you get 16 minutes of footage on a $1000 1TB SSD or over 5.5TB ($5500) for a 90 minute movie so prices would really need to come down but uncompressed wouldn't be necessary for long sequences so the 1.25GB/s speed of Apple's PCIe SSD will be useful for shorter media. It only goes up to 1TB so far but I wonder if the Mac Pro will get a larger option. Either way, bulk storage has to go outside and that's for the best as it means it's far easier to buy new machines.
Maybe try converting to 120fps ProRes in Quicktime Pro and then import that to FCPX. The video quality looks nice on the 5S as well as the photos. Here's a video shot on a 5S:
It might not use all the cores fully on the top-end model:
http://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2011/20110624_1_FinalCutProX--howto.html
but an 8-core will give you a boost over the quad.
It can be quite a lot if you realize you don't have any creative potential.
Plus not everyone is going to rush out to get the latest Mac Pro. Many will just use their current one and check online what they can buy after their current one dies.
Really cool these slow-mo videos popping up on the net. I like this one as well:
Future proofing as in storage and screen is external I take it. Well, that certainly is a good way to look at it. I presume one is able to use their iMac screen for their new MP?
LOL!
You release a cheap Mac, margins would be lower. Not only that, people willing to buy the $1200 iMac will then buy the cheap Mac instead thus you lose a sale at the higher end. Soon more people will buy the cheap Mac and you eat your sales at the higher end and possibly eat the iPad sales. Thus lower margins and lower profit.
Within a week everyone had given up with osx and had win 8 installed instead. Seems iOS lovers don't necessarily translate to mac lovers. Everyone does seem to love the hardware though.
Maybe Apple should consider abandoning OSX and work out a way to put iOS on a desktop.
Just to follow up on the above... It seems the problem causing FCPX import to struggle was unrelated to the iPhone 5S, the 120 fps SloMo footage, the Mac OS or the iMac. The problem is caused when the [event target] Promise Pegasus RAID's space gets low during import.
When available space gets around 1.5 GB, the Pegasus slows down significantly -- even though there is enough space to complete the import.
AFAICT, there is a lot of pent up demand for a new, faster Mac Pro from the current Mac Pro users. I suspect some will be dissatisfied that they can't use their existing hardware components in the new model.
In answer to @Marvin, I suggested that the new Mac Pro may attract new [to the Mac or to the Mac Pro] users that are topping out on their iMacs or Windows or Linux machines.
I posted an update to my conversion problems -- my RAID was running out of space and that slowed everything down. Turns out, when space is available, FCPX handles the import with ease -- much faster than transferring the SloMo file to the mac then exporting in QT:
1) Connect the iPhone to the Mac
2) With FCPX, import 120 fps to a FCPX Event (Trans code optional) -- the 120 fps clips are rendered/played in the event as 60 fps (realtime)
3) When you include the clip in a timeline you can play at realtime 60 fps, or 1-click conform to SloMo at 120 fps -- or manually retime from anything 1,000 times slower or faster
The only expandable Macs I ever owned were a Mac II (circa 1987) and the Developer Intal Mac which had the current Mac Pro form factor. The latter was a real beast -- a floor top rather than a desktop computer. But, even with all the room inside, "expansion" was rather limited -- few PCI cards and a few additional disks. At the time I was using PPC iMacs and had about 1.5 TB of external FireWire LaCie HDDs. Couldn't match that with internal drives on a Mac Pro.
So yes, I applaud Apple for designing the new Mac Pro for relatively unlimited external expansion as opposed to limited internal expansion.
Sigh, as you know, I can't use the iMac screen as an external monitor. I have a 24" iMac with a bad internal drive -- that I boot from a 2TB LaCie FireWire 800 drive. But I've always wanted the option to use an iMac as an additional display. They have FW Target Disk Mode -- why not Target Display Mode.
The point I was attempting to make is that Apple has dramatically lowered the entry fee for video editing to on tenth of what was 13 years ago. It is now affordable to millions who couldn't even think about it last decade.
In 2000, a pro-quality video editing seat was as inaccessible as a maimframe computer in its heyday.
Today, if you have access to a Mac, and $400-$500 you can experiment with pro-quality video editing -- and see if it works for you... With the proliferation of videos on the web I think it works for many.
If being the most powerful company in the world is being held back...then what the hell does that make every other company?
Intel does decrease prices from time to time as yields improve, but you're right that all OEMs have access to those price adjustments.
Apple issued speed bumps earlier this year to the MacBook Pro from 2.3GHz to 2.4GHz and 2.6GHz to 2.7GHz when Intel made the faster chips available at the same price that the slower ones had previously been. It's safe to assume that Apple did this because MacBook Pro customers are important to them.
Today the 2.6GHz i7-3720QM and 2.7GHz i7-3740QM both cost exactly the same amount and that price is identical to what customers previously paid for the 2.3GHz 3610QM yet the Mac mini continues to carry the older, slower CPU. It's safe to assume that Apple doesn't worry about giving Mac mini customers the best possible bang for their buck.
The 3610QM no longer appears on the Intel price list so it's not known whether customers with long term supply agreements for the older chip are getting a discount or not.
FYI the Core i7 4800MQ is priced identically to the 3740QM so it's pretty safe to assume that it will be the CPU in the late 2013 Retina MacBook Pro.
Ouote:
Originally Posted by runbuh
"Don't forget the business side of the equation: What business wants to support an OS X device when the device can't access the systems that the business uses? Cisco support for VoIP clients on OS X? No feature parity with Windows. Cisco/Juniper VPN support (especially client inspection)? Sucks. 802.1X/NAC for OS X? Always an also ran to Windows (try doing machine and user auth with certificates in OS X). The ability to remotely manage the system, control software deployments, apply policies, etc.? Always an also ran to Windows, especially with 3rd party support. Has DISA even issued a STIG for Lion, much less Mountain Lion? No.
"Windows has the marketshare, which means the vendors provide better/faster support for Windows, which sells more Windows machines, which keeps their marketshare up, etc." End quote.
Apple holds back tech updates for a long time. Look at the Mini. It is the bastard step child in the Mac line. They keep old chips around longer than their competition.
Apple does innovate There is no doubt about it. They just don't spread the love to all of their line.
Their obsession with design is stupid. It shouldn't overshadow the purpose of their devices. This is probably a reason they won't build a small tower with more power than a Mini. The iMacs are like anorexic fashion models. They look good on the outside, cost a lot, but you wouldn't get one to help you build a house (Enterprise). What's up with the 5400 rpm drives?
Optical drives are still useful for consumers. Since Apple obviously isn't going for enterprise sales by not making their software compatible with important enterprise applications, why the hell drop optical drives?
Blu-Ray is a market that will be around for a while. If you want proof go to Walmart. They only sell things that people buy. They have a Blu-Ray section. I'm not saying they should be added to iMacs. It is just an observation that they are still a wanted product.
Years ago I believed Apple products were not priced too high. I am typing this on my Mac Book. Now I do believe they are because of their slow adoption of the best chips and the dropping of features. Now that I actually prefer GNU/Linux I'm comparing hardware. OSX is better than Windows but it isn't better than several Linux distributions.
My next machine will probably be a Chromebook. I will dual boot it. It has what I want without the gigantic price of a Mac Book Air. The video performance of low end chips is now good enough to do what I need. I realized I don't need an i7. The DDR3 speeds and 4 GB of RAM will do what I need, which is streaming videos and listening to music in a portable device capable of being connected to an external monitor with HDMI.
Far more people want a low end functional machine than a $1000 buy in price for a laptop. If Apple wants to ignore such a gigantic market it is fine with me. I don't own Apple stock.
The writing is on the wall. Apple will kill the Mac line. They just haven't realized it yet, or they have and won't admit it publicly. If they refuse to update their high quality/over priced/under spec'd products at a pace equal to or faster than their lower priced competition, and refuse to enter the lower end market, their computer division will eventually shrink and die.
Low price doesn't always mean low quality. Apple could build a mid-range computer for the masses and win if they would lower their margin. The Mac Mini for $349 with its current base model would be a great start. Just make the case out of pressed steel instead of blocks of aluminum. Add a CD ROM drive to boot. It would be a winner.
The iPod Touch is a device I want to own. I just think it is overpriced by $200 for the 64 GB model. I can get a great Android phone with that much storage and a bigger screen for much less on a phone contract that I use anyway. Where is the compelling reason to buy one? It certainly isn't price or features. IOS is their new bread and butter. They just need to remember that some innovation from somewhere else might quickly kill them just like the iPhone killed RIM and their Blackberry.
People hate change. There are some windows only programs so there probably was a need for win8. Apple already sold the hardware.
Your last statement is ludicrous.
Good luck with the chrome book. I hope you're always connected to the internet
Apple doesn't need the low end market. It does fine with the highend market (45% profit share).
Good luck with the chrome book. I hope you're always connected to the internet
Apple doesn't need the low end market. It does fine with the highend market (45% profit share).
Chrome OS now has features that work offline. Even so, the dual boot with a GNU/Linux OS will make it just fine for offline work. If I get the new Acer I'll be up and running for $249 plus the additional price of an SD card to increase the storage capacity to a total of 80 GB. With multiple SD cards I won't have any storage problems ever. I intend to divide the original 16 GB SSD equally between Chrome and GNU/Linux. Windows is totally out of the picture for me. YAY!
What if Apple could capture a much larger percentage of the home PC market by making one low cost desktop and one low cost laptop? Do you think their high end customers would stop buying the expensive Macs? I don't think so. Already people are buying the expensive Macs even though the overpriced Mini has been around for many years.
Apple now has the iPhone 5c yet the 5s is selling so well it is back-ordered for 2-3 weeks. Apple is learning a lesson because of this. Perhaps they will extend this to the computer market if they really intend to continue in it long term. Maybe they will create low cost A7 computers that run iOS a la Google's new Android powered laptops. In theory it sounds good but they already charge a fortune for the 64 GB iPod Touch. Until they rethink their profit structure for entry level devices it won't happen.
No, they wait till there is something worthwhile to put in their hardware
And people love it, gets bought by the batch. Enterprise stuff, this Mini.
I think Apple is the only company spreading their love across all their products. Heck, even the inside of their computers used to get a signature because they were so proud of what they created.
It doesn't. As a matter of fact, it complements its purpose.
They actually do.
Wow.
1) never seen a person suffering from anorexia who looked good to me
2) iMacs cost a lot?
3) 'build a house' ??
4) 5400 drives? Choice; isn't that what 'people like you' want?
They'r not in the enterprise software business. And ODD are a no-no in enterprises. Many disable the USB ports as well.
So buy external, or get a MP and pop one in, while you still can.
They never changed this. We now simply get more bang for the same buck, but that's just the evolution in IT.
Preferring Linux makes it possible for you to get a cheaper HW solution. Build it yourself, or get a Dell or whatever.
That's quite an investment! $1299 with 4GB RAM and 32GB SSD. Sounds more expensive than something mobile from Apple.
I'm starting to give up on you...
Sales figures say otherwise. You should look stuff up before posting.
There are vacancies for people like you at Apple Inc.
You call that competition? I call them incompetent!
By giving us the Mini for 500 bucks, some 8 years ago.
Not as fast as their 'competition'
Good point, although you do get what you pay for.
Please, no. They'd get 'people like you' as their new customers, and we wouldn't want to have to deal with, well, posts like this one. Or people agreeing to it.
Thanks for showing me being incapable of responding to this; I simply couldn't ever explain to you why you are so wrong, and on so many levels.
Today, if you have access to a Mac, and $400-$500 you can experiment with pro-quality video editing -- and see if it works for you... With the proliferation of videos on the web I think it works for many.
One might argue that the development you describe has had the same affect on video that the previous decade had on independent music production. Prior to the Great Democratization, those who could not attract the attention of financiers had no hope of realizing their vision. Now, anybody can produce and distribute their garbage no matter how bad it is!
At least "cost of entry" provided some degree of shit filtering.
And people love it, gets bought by the batch. Enterprise stuff, this Mini.
Not arguing for or against the post to which you reply, but for the record, I have need for a mini at the moment and am delaying the purchase until it is updated with current internals. To me it DOES seem like Haswell/Iris is the kind of thing that should have been included by now. The only possible explanations for delaying it are being able to make a fuss by claiming that using something other than a two-year-old CPU qualifies it to claim to be a "new model," or Crazy Jony has a new look he wants to try out and everyone has to make do with dated equipment until he has a chance to get around to it.
4) 5400 drives? Choice; isn't that what 'people like you' want?
I don't understand. Are you saying that 5400 rpm drives are anything less than ridiculous in any computer than costs more than $399?
To those of us who feel Jony Ive may be losing the plot, those drives are what we call "evidence." The lust for an unnecessarily thin iMac resulted in a computer that dissipates heat poorly, precluding the use of higher-performance drives because they get too hot. He sacrificed the very tangible benefit of higher speed in order to achieve a look. That's the very definition of "form over function" and is the kind of thinking that drives fashion, not technology.
Shit will always Surface.
Then buy one. It really is that simple. There is nothing 'wrong' with the current model, and if you need one, well, get it.
Ok, so you need one, but not now. Then wait. But make no mistake on how long this might take, for whatever reason, and do not even think it has anything to do with something new Apple is waiting on to hit the market. Because that is by no means any reason for them to wait.
I'm saying I wouldn't buy a PC with a HDD in it, but that's my preference. Other are perfectly fine with old tech, be it mechanically spinning discs, rotating at lower speeds of 5400rpm.
I haven't been reading up on tech, only Apple rumors. Are the new iMacs having problems? Or are they mostly being sold with SSD anyways therefore making this possible point moot? I don't know, but I wouldn't expect Apple to release a product that is having problems, HW-wise.
This is probably a reason they won't build a small tower with more power than a Mini.
No, they won’t do that because Apple isn’t in the business of making worthless junk.
Optical drives are still useful for consumers.
Not Apple’s consumers. Get over it.
Blu-Ray is a market that will be around for a while. If you want proof go to Walmart. They only sell things that people buy. They have a Blu-Ray section. I'm not saying they should be added to iMacs. It is just an observation that they are still a wanted product.
Not by Apple’s customers.
Duh. This wasn’t obvious? Eventually we won’t be using mice and physical keyboards. When that happens, it won’t be a Mac that you buy, just as we aren’t currently buying Apple XCVIIIs.
Please. It’s Apple.
Not really, no, since sales of the aforementioned (horribly defined, by you) products have only increased compared to the “properly priced”, “over spec’d” trash from everyone else.
But in the case of every PC, it does.
You know nothing about Apple.
It’d be great if they could get the Mini back down to $499 like the G4 model was. Other than that, no, they don’t need to compromise to create crap.
Funny, I didn’t know “utter failure” was spelled with six letters.
Yep, a $2,400 phone costs less than an iPod touch. Oh, and is meant for the same market, by the way.
It certainly isn’t possible that you just can’t think of one because you have no use for a PMP and can’t comprehend anyone’s wishes but your own¡
When was the last time anyone in the industry but Apple did ANY innovation?
Apple is happy with the $1000+ market. They also have something like 45% profit share. They don't do cheap.
Ok, so you need one, but not now. Then wait. But make no mistake on how long this might take, for whatever reason, and do not even think it has anything to do with something new Apple is waiting on to hit the market. Because that is by no means any reason for them to wait.
So, your point is that Apple really doesn't give Shit One what their customers want or expect, they will just do whatever the hell they want whenever they want and if we don't like it we can just suck it? High praise. Gee, why would I ever consider another vendor?
I haven't been reading up on tech, only Apple rumors. Are the new iMacs having problems? Or are they mostly being sold with SSD anyways therefore making this possible point moot?
Seriously? C'mon Phil, now you're being disingenuous. If Ford built a car with a choice of engines, the least expensive of which would overheat, would you defend Ford by arguing that most people buy the more expensive engine so it doesn't really matter? Of course not.
I don't know how many HHDs vs. Fusion they sold BEFORE THE SSD WAS EVEN AVAILABLE, but it doesn't affect MY POINT which was that the design puts form before function.
This is probably a reason they won't build a small tower with more power than a Mini.
No, they won’t do that because Apple isn’t in the business of making worthless junk.
What would make a small tower "worthless junk?" I can think of all kinds of ways that a "Mac Medium" could open up a whole new market. It may not be a market Apple wants, like large-screen notebooks, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea.
Optical drives are still useful for consumers.
Not Apple’s consumers. Get over it.
That's a ridiculous remark. The only reason Apple's consumers don't consume optical drives is because they CAN'T.
YOU may not see a need, but lots of people still prefer to consume media via physical disc, and there are still really good reasons for them to do so. Get over it. Why do you get your panties bunched up over that?
"Because it's all in the software"
- Steve Jobs at AllThingsD, 2000something