Apple MAC Professional model

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Do you remember those boxes a few macworlds back where there were six different boxes with two per category with a consumer range, mid-range and pro range?



I've only "heard" that there will be an even higher end model that will move the current Pro-Mac to the mid-range(where the cube was) and sport different processors and RAM buses altogether.



Does this sound familiar.



[ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: willywalloo ]</p>

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 14
    mtm84mtm84 Posts: 15member
    where did you "hear" this exactly? My radar is dead on this, except for a few blips about a workstation mac, but that was related to the new powermac pics, and pretty much died off, I think.
  • Reply 2 of 14
    I think I heard about it on a news rumor site, which sounds pretty intrigueing when you hear stuff about AMD's and Mac's getting in bed with one another.



    What have you heard
  • Reply 3 of 14
    Also it would seem like the next step Apple would take to pair something with it's Xserve. Get a computer that runs even faster than that, so, say, Rendering @ pixar doesn't take so long on those Silicon Graphics farms.



    It would be a weird stray, but maybe it's Apple's ongoing strategy to "get rid of the floppy."



    -walloo
  • Reply 4 of 14
    mtm84mtm84 Posts: 15member
    I have a short term memory <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" /> But it just centered around the fact that the new pics/info said that there would be massive cooling and a big 7 pound heat sink, which was to be used for a big hot CPU(maybe 2x or 4x cpus), but I dont think there was any info about apple/amd (though I have heard that they are working a chip, but its pure speculation, and I have no information on their efforts). Then the news came of an IBM built POWER4 based PPC for use with "desktops and low-end servers", which kinda stoped the workstation train of thought, I think.
  • Reply 5 of 14
    brbr Posts: 8,395member
    It would be nice to see an ultra-high end model. Unfortunately this thread will probably be locked because there is most likely another thread that this relates to. You'd think there is some quota or reward for locking threads with 18 of 40 on the front page here being locked.



    EDIT: Update - 19 of 40. Way to go.



    [ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: BR ]</p>
  • Reply 6 of 14
    jambojambo Posts: 3,036member
    [quote]Originally posted by BR:

    <strong>Unfortunately this thread will probably be locked because there is most likely another thread that this relates to.

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Nope, I can't find it. Maybe you'd like to point it out to me?
  • Reply 7 of 14
    THIS IS A JAW-DROPPING EXPERIENCE.



    whoa.
  • Reply 8 of 14
    The idea of a 4x CPU has been tossed around, I have heard that one.



    I think the quote was..'Apple will finally show us the Power of the G4 and unveil a 4x system'



    But wouldn't that only make sense for a super-high end system?
  • Reply 9 of 14
    brbr Posts: 8,395member
    [quote]Originally posted by Jamie:

    <strong>



    Nope, I can't find it. Maybe you'd like to point it out to me?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Well, there have been numerous threads that have discussed the need for a high-end workstation to compliment recent 3d hardware and software acquisitions. Unfortunately, they have been locked for one silly reason or another. I guess we'll just have to let this thread go 3 pages and then lock it so we can have another new thread discussing the same thing 2 weeks later.
  • Reply 10 of 14
    jambojambo Posts: 3,036member
    [quote]Originally posted by willywalloo:

    <strong>THIS IS A JAW-DROPPING EXPERIENCE.



    whoa.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    willywalloo - Check your private messages.
  • Reply 11 of 14
    Yah about the whole locking thing, don't get me started about the whole locking thing we had today, but maybe hopefully the forum will spawn a new rumor that is hopefully true.



    I think I've gotta take a break, that's all I know for now.



    --&gt;JAMIE, even though your private message said nothing about the "JAWDROPPING" quote, the emotion behind that was more me being happy and amazed that it has stayed unlocked and nothing of vengence. (thanks)



    [ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: willywalloo ]</p>
  • Reply 12 of 14
    [quote]Originally posted by willywalloo:

    <strong>The idea of a 4x CPU has been tossed around, I have heard that one.



    I think the quote was..'Apple will finally show us the Power of the G4 and unveil a 4x system'



    But wouldn't that only make sense for a super-high end system?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    IIRC, some of the engineers here have noted previously that the current OS X kernel doesn't (can't?) support 4 chip pipelining without some new type of onchip controller. dual ok. quad not properly implemented (more buck, negligible bang yet)



    mmcist? programmer? who deserves the footnote citation?



    Jaguar go any way towards addressing (pun) this?



    hmmmm?
  • Reply 13 of 14
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    [quote]Originally posted by curiousuburb:

    <strong>IIRC, some of the engineers here have noted previously that the current OS X kernel doesn't (can't?) support 4 chip pipelining without some new type of onchip controller. dual ok. quad not properly implemented (more buck, negligible bang yet)</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I'm not sure I follow.



    The OS X kernel would simply need a constant changed from 2 to 4 (or more ), a recompile, and (realistically) testing to make sure nothing broke. It's currently configured for "up to two processors" because there's no point configuring it for more.



    The CPUs themselves might require extra support logic to run in a quad configuation; I'm not up on the extent or quality of the 7455's MP support.



    However, the biggest problem is keeping four G4s fat and happy. That will require a whole new, radically different motherboard.



    [ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
  • Reply 14 of 14
    [quote]Originally posted by Amorph:

    <strong>



    However, the biggest problem is keeping four G4s fat and happy. That will require a whole new, radically different motherboard.



    [ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</strong><hr></blockquote>



    ... it's starting to sound more and more like Moki is a credible source , (if I got the moniker right), isn't he the guy who said that Apple had two mobo's they where working on, a fairly significant update which would've been full DDR, FW2 etc ... and a second insurance upgrade ... unfortunately, they had problems with the better mobo, and he said - about a month ago - that we where probably going to get the stopgap instead.



    Well, if the current Mac don't scream stop-gap, I don't know what does. I'd say his take on events was probably correct.



    This seems to point more and more to the expense and danger of trying to go it alone as a computer company, there just seems to be a lot more to building a good mobo than was expected.



    Apple seems kinda stuck between a rock and a hard place, waiting for a G5 and another company working on G5 mobo's and chipset problems to team up with and save them.



    (kinda makes you wonder if IBM won't make Apple sweat a few billion, delay the G5 just long enough to kill Apple's stock, and then just buy 'em and parachute in with all the hardware solutions necessary)
Sign In or Register to comment.