The reduction in power usage and materials are impressive but what are the odds that one will have to use additional HW? For instance, this new Mac Pro doesn't have any internal 3.5" HDDs. Are buyers likely to purchase TB RAIDs to fulfill a need that was previously met by the large Mac Pro? How do this affect the overall environmental costs?
That's an interesting question and why I think these environmental reports are be silly. I doubt the nMP was designed this way purely for environmental reasons.
Right at the bottom of my first post. Please just stop, at this point your just arguing for the sake of it, not even over the article, but as a personal attack against somebody who was pointing out that there are more important things in this article than the texture used in the pie chart.
Your canned afterthought comment in no way will help buoy the conversation of this thread and does absolutely nothing for your credibility of staying focused on the only topic you claim is worth discussing. You ruined that with your first words of your first post and you continue to do that.
I, on the other hand, feel that everything is worth discussing (for better or for worse). I have expressed my concerns about the relative success of the environmental savings when the larger picture is considered, I commented on the graph being inaccurate, and I also stated that I dislike the wood grain effect. You could have ignored my comments on the wood grain instead of repeatedly making hypocritical comments about it.
Now I remember why I usually just lurk and read. No use throwing oneself to the wolves by trying to talk sense and actually talk about the article rather than something inconsequential that has hijacked the comments.
If you're gonna post to talk sense to someone, don't pick (arguably) the most sensible guy on the forum. Did you get so hung up on the first point and not read on or choose to ignore the 2nd comment and 3rd, the contribution of fixing the pie slice proportions? Mmmmmm, pie.
I doubt the nMP was designed this way purely for environmental reasons.
Despite what others have said I think Apple is well aware of what their buyers do with Mac Pros. I would guess that customers don't do too many after-market upgrades of GPUs or install PCIe cards. I would also bet that customers stick with limited internal storage and then use a large attached or network storage solution over limiting themselves to 4x3.5" bays.
If my suspicions are even close to correct then the net gain from reducing the materials, size, weight, and power consumption for the new Mac Pro are indeed significant.
This is why thinner and therefore lighter iMacs are a priority for Apple. Weight savings equals less fuel/shipping costs, etc., etc. Not to mention the savings in materiel. (Don't fix it for me, I meant "materiel" not "material." Thx!)
I have an orig. intel. 20" iMac. My GF brought home her new iMac from work for me to set-up for her...I lifted it out of the box and was amazed at how light it was compared to my "old" iMac. What a wonderful machine!
Best.
P.S. I like hearing news like this...reminds me of the 11 toyota plants in Europe which are "zero landfill" factories. American companies should be so responsible. Like Apple!
When you count the Pros who will move to the iMac, and replace it (and its display) every 2.5 years instead of 5, along with the amount of aluminium and power that will be used up by multiple separate external Thunderbolt drives, is the planet much further ahead?
I've said for a long time that Apple's "concern" for the environment is largely about watching out for their own bottom line.
If they really want to make an impact, they should redesign their flagship consumer desktop to allow for RAM, Hard Drive and GPU replacements.
You know what, your right, you win, the wood grain is awful and apple insider should have known better than to post it, bad journalism.
Perhaps you should go outside, come back in, and start again. And if you had been lurking here for very long you would have realized that your criticism was misplaced.
It is a bit strange to have used the wooden look - I thought Apple had ditched that with the faux leather. And the breakout is weird. Are we to conclude that Apple has developed a power supply containing no plastic, copper, aluminum, steel or circuit boards? On the other hand, I also completely agree that this shows a serious level of attention to recycling and energy costs.
When you count the Pros who will move to the iMac, and replace it (and its display) every 2.5 years instead of 5, along with the amount of aluminium and power that will be used up by multiple separate external Thunderbolt drives, is the planet much further ahead?
I've said for a long time that Apple's "concern" for the environment is largely about watching out for their own bottom line.
If they really want to make an impact, they should redesign their flagship consumer desktop to allow for RAM, Hard Drive and GPU replacements.
Pros may indeed trade up, but there will be a market for their used machines. I'll let others correct you on RAM , etc. replaceability.
If you've been saying that for a long time, that just means you've been wrong for a long time. These guys are serious environmentalists, at least as serious as any you'll find in the electronic hardware business.
That's an interesting question and why I think these environmental reports are be silly. I doubt the nMP was designed this way purely for environmental reasons.
It was designed this way primarily for thermal efficiency. That has energy and material consequences that ought to be calculated and pointed out.
Whether there's an offsetting loss from peripheralizing everything ought to be in the calculations too. Maybe the design will prompt others to come out with more efficient heat-extraction designs as well.
Comments
Your canned afterthought comment in no way will help buoy the conversation of this thread and does absolutely nothing for your credibility of staying focused on the only topic you claim is worth discussing. You ruined that with your first words of your first post and you continue to do that.
I, on the other hand, feel that everything is worth discussing (for better or for worse). I have expressed my concerns about the relative success of the environmental savings when the larger picture is considered, I commented on the graph being inaccurate, and I also stated that I dislike the wood grain effect. You could have ignored my comments on the wood grain instead of repeatedly making hypocritical comments about it.
If you're gonna post to talk sense to someone, don't pick (arguably) the most sensible guy on the forum. Did you get so hung up on the first point and not read on or choose to ignore the 2nd comment and 3rd, the contribution of fixing the pie slice proportions? Mmmmmm, pie.
Despite what others have said I think Apple is well aware of what their buyers do with Mac Pros. I would guess that customers don't do too many after-market upgrades of GPUs or install PCIe cards. I would also bet that customers stick with limited internal storage and then use a large attached or network storage solution over limiting themselves to 4x3.5" bays.
If my suspicions are even close to correct then the net gain from reducing the materials, size, weight, and power consumption for the new Mac Pro are indeed significant.
1) That image comes from Apple's own PDF. It even saves 'Source: Apple" below it.
2) Why exactly am I not allowed to dislike it without you getting so upset you have to create an account do exactly what you are accusing me of doing?
75% less aluminum...fantastic.
This is why thinner and therefore lighter iMacs are a priority for Apple. Weight savings equals less fuel/shipping costs, etc., etc. Not to mention the savings in materiel. (Don't fix it for me, I meant "materiel" not "material." Thx!)
I have an orig. intel. 20" iMac. My GF brought home her new iMac from work for me to set-up for her...I lifted it out of the box and was amazed at how light it was compared to my "old" iMac. What a wonderful machine!
Best.
P.S. I like hearing news like this...reminds me of the 11 toyota plants in Europe which are "zero landfill" factories. American companies should be so responsible. Like Apple!
When you count the Pros who will move to the iMac, and replace it (and its display) every 2.5 years instead of 5, along with the amount of aluminium and power that will be used up by multiple separate external Thunderbolt drives, is the planet much further ahead?
I've said for a long time that Apple's "concern" for the environment is largely about watching out for their own bottom line.
If they really want to make an impact, they should redesign their flagship consumer desktop to allow for RAM, Hard Drive and GPU replacements.
You know what, your right, you win, the wood grain is awful and apple insider should have known better than to post it, bad journalism.
Perhaps you should go outside, come back in, and start again. And if you had been lurking here for very long you would have realized that your criticism was misplaced.
It is a bit strange to have used the wooden look - I thought Apple had ditched that with the faux leather. And the breakout is weird. Are we to conclude that Apple has developed a power supply containing no plastic, copper, aluminum, steel or circuit boards? On the other hand, I also completely agree that this shows a serious level of attention to recycling and energy costs.
Pros may indeed trade up, but there will be a market for their used machines. I'll let others correct you on RAM , etc. replaceability.
If you've been saying that for a long time, that just means you've been wrong for a long time. These guys are serious environmentalists, at least as serious as any you'll find in the electronic hardware business.
It was designed this way primarily for thermal efficiency. That has energy and material consequences that ought to be calculated and pointed out.
Whether there's an offsetting loss from peripheralizing everything ought to be in the calculations too. Maybe the design will prompt others to come out with more efficient heat-extraction designs as well.