Should Apple outsource ProMac workstation?

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 41
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,402member
    Onlooker



    that BOXX Quad Opteron system does make me smile for what the future holds. I think that setup will be standard high end by 2007. Dual socketed Dual-Core setups. I think you might finally see your Quadro come to the Mac. There's no reason not to. Apple can sit by and make small modifications to Intel's reference designs and focus more on optimizations.



    Apple indeeds should be looking to ship identical hardware to BOXX and Alienware because unless they deviate too much Windows can easily be ran in a dual boot config on Macintel. It'd be nice to have that flexibility.
  • Reply 22 of 41
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    Fastest x86 on the planet vs. fastest Mac on the planet is a fair comparison... if money is no object. But very few people fall into that category.
  • Reply 23 of 41
    I heard a rumor that Apple will be re-branding e-machine pcs and selling them at PPC prices. They will use off the shelf intel parts (cheap crap) hoping the end user will buy into the hype and BS...
  • Reply 24 of 41
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Onlooker



    that BOXX Quad Opteron system does make me smile for what the future holds. I think that setup will be standard high end by 2007. Dual socketed Dual-Core setups. I think you might finally see your Quadro come to the Mac. There's no reason not to. Apple can sit by and make small modifications to Intel's reference designs and focus more on optimizations.



    Apple indeeds should be looking to ship identical hardware to BOXX and Alienware because unless they deviate too much Windows can easily be ran in a dual boot config on Macintel. It'd be nice to have that flexibility.




    Now that it's released I think it's pretty much standard high-end today. 3DCG is a power hungry bastard.



    I hope your right, and Apple does use 2x dual core processors right off the bat. They need to make it clear they can deliver the performance under any processor on whatever platform, and just as well as the next guy.

    If they can get PC video cards working right out of the box (for the most part) that will solidify this transitions success for me, and cut off one of the biggest reasons why people don't buy Macs.
  • Reply 25 of 41
    junkyard dawgjunkyard dawg Posts: 2,801member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by onlooker

    With these cooler processors which would give us sufficient room in the case do you think Apple will go all the way, and offer things like dual internal RAID, hot swappable drive chassis, and possibly SLI graphics? What about stuff like 5.1, and/or 7.1 sound native right on the motherboard?



    Does Apple offer any of these technologies on today's Powermacs? Does PPC prohibit the use of any of these technologies? Sure, the high end Powermacs are liquid cooled, but then so are some of these high end Wintels, and they serve up these technologies right along with the liquid cooling.



    So no, Apple will not begin stuffing their Powermacs full of technical goodness just because they changed CPU suppliers. As long as Apple doesn't directly compete with the Wintel box movers, they have no reason to offer competitive hardware. I'd go so far as to suggest that Apple will hobble their bad-ass Intel CPUs with cheap chipsets and enough penny-pinching hacks to make the MacIntels feel more like MacOrolas.
  • Reply 26 of 41
    vinney57vinney57 Posts: 1,162member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg





    So no, Apple will not begin stuffing their Powermacs full of technical goodness just because they changed CPU suppliers. As long as Apple doesn't directly compete with the Wintel box movers, they have no reason to offer competitive hardware. I'd go so far as to suggest that Apple will hobble their bad-ass Intel CPUs with cheap chipsets and enough penny-pinching hacks to make the MacIntels feel more like MacOrolas.




    Complete bollocks as per usual JD. Polemic written either to vent an emotion that has nothing to do with the topic in hand or simply to ellicit a reaction. Go and punch a pillow or something.
  • Reply 27 of 41
    placeboplacebo Posts: 5,767member
    Apple will have no problem building an extremely competitive and upgradeable workstation with Intel. Even the G5 was competitive, but it was soon eclipsed by the continually-accellerating PC processor industry.
  • Reply 28 of 41
    hasapihasapi Posts: 290member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg

    So no, Apple will not begin stuffing their Powermacs full of technical goodness just because they changed CPU suppliers. As long as Apple doesn't directly compete with the Wintel box movers, they have no reason to offer competitive hardware. I'd go so far as to suggest that Apple will hobble their bad-ass Intel CPUs with cheap chipsets and enough penny-pinching hacks to make the MacIntels feel more like MacOrolas.



    Spoken like a true cynic!, Despite all the optimisim being thrown around, id like to see Apple DELIVER before getting too excited about the type of PowerMacs Apple 'can' produce.



    I hope Dawg is wrong - but im afraid weve been bitten before and realistically not the last time.
  • Reply 29 of 41
    cubistcubist Posts: 954member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by I hate Apple NOW

    I heard a rumor that Apple ... will use off the shelf intel parts (cheap crap) hoping the end user will buy into the hype and BS...



    This is, sadly, probably true. But look on the bright side. Even if they use some kludge (like special cards or ROMs) so that Marklar won't boot on completely generic hardware, you can get the cheapest Mac and upgrade the CPU, RAM, add third party boards, etc. - basically upgrade everything except the bleepin' kludge - and have a fast machine for far less money.
  • Reply 30 of 41
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg

    Does Apple offer any of these technologies on today's Powermacs? Does PPC prohibit the use of any of these technologies? Sure, the high end Powermacs are liquid cooled, but then so are some of these high end Wintels, and they serve up these technologies right along with the liquid cooling.



    So no, Apple will not begin stuffing their Powermacs full of technical goodness just because they changed CPU suppliers. As long as Apple doesn't directly compete with the Wintel box movers, they have no reason to offer competitive hardware. I'd go so far as to suggest that Apple will hobble their bad-ass Intel CPUs with cheap chipsets and enough penny-pinching hacks to make the MacIntels feel more like MacOrolas.




    That's pretty harsh JYD, I never figured out why Apple didn't decide to use at least 5.1 audio right off the motherboard on the G5 UMA, but I think this transition will bring them back up to speed. I imagine it made less sense to start improving what they may have known was a dead PPC UMA, and just let it skip by until they transitioned it to intel.



    I'm hoping for such a drastic revision my heart will flutter. It seems they have been holding things back for a while. This may be what they were waiting for.

    We can hope.
  • Reply 31 of 41
    bootsboots Posts: 33member
    As I was just posting on Ars Technica..



    think about how high Apple could take one of the Intel processors by simply placing it in the existing G5 chassis and cooling system. They already have a proven liquid cooling system ready to go. Might not be the first choice for the midrange machines but it could provide an edge at the top end.
  • Reply 32 of 41
    Just for jollies, I configured a maxed out Alienware ALX Xeon with dual 512MB SLI, 2 dual layer DVD drives, 4- 74GB Raptor drives and it came to $7300.



    It does give me hope that we'll eventually be able to BTO our Macs as desired.



    I hope Apple and Intel will configure a new motherboard that supports

    8 RAM slots rather than standard 4 slots available on todays machines.
  • Reply 33 of 41
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree

    Just for jollies, I configured a maxed out Alienware ALX Xeon with dual 512MB SLI, 2 dual layer DVD drives, 4- 74GB Raptor drives and it came to $7300.



    It does give me hope that we'll eventually be able to BTO our Macs as desired.



    I hope Apple and Intel will configure a new motherboard that supports

    8 RAM slots rather than standard 4 slots available on todays machines.




    Although the ALX is a gaming machine, and case design it is very capable. I prefer the workstation design. I like it better than the current look from Apple, or BOXX which both resemble each other.
  • Reply 34 of 41
    shawkshawk Posts: 116member
    For workstation or pro use, keep your eye on the Itanium 2.

    Were Intel to do their version of the Power 4 to G5 conversion, the Itanium would be a good place to start looking.

    For Apple, the Yonah dual core might be the Intel equivalent of the G4/G3.



    Four and eight socket Itanium dual core systems with a chipset for complete support is mentioned as being available. Now for samples and real quick for production quantities. This could make a serious workstation.

    It's listed as a RISC replacement.



    Detalis here and here
  • Reply 35 of 41
    As long as Apple offers that same kind of expandability in a ProMac

    Workstation, I'm sure any new chassis design will be far more elegant than

    the current offerings from Alienware or Boxx.
  • Reply 36 of 41
    cubistcubist Posts: 954member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by shawk

    For workstation or pro use, keep your eye on the Itanic 2.

    ...




    What, Apple should support THREE processor architectures? Let's jump from the ship that seems to be taking on a little water, to the ship which is definitely sinking. Even you are calling it the Itanic - that was Scott McNealy's derisive moniker for the junker Intel calls "Itanium".
  • Reply 37 of 41
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,402member
    Apple should leave the option open to support Itanium. Working with Intel they could leverage Intel's compilers and other tech here.



    I think initially we'll be happy with Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest(Xeon) to cover the line but if Apple should ever look to really flex their Unix muscle then Itanium should definitely be considered.
  • Reply 38 of 41
    shawkshawk Posts: 116member
    Apple could easily support multiple architectures.

    NeXT supported or built several:

    M68, X86, PPC, PA-RISC, SPARC, Alpha and ARM.

    At the time, NeXT had fewer employees than Microsoft had janitors.
  • Reply 39 of 41
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cubist

    What, Apple should support THREE processor architectures? Let's jump from the ship that seems to be taking on a little water, to the ship which is definitely sinking. Even you are calling it the Itanic - that was Scott McNealy's derisive moniker for the junker Intel calls "Itanium".



    The only new architecture they are supporting is x86, but Apple has more than one chip design for the G4 alone for Laptops, and desktops now, and hoped for more than one with the G5.
  • Reply 40 of 41
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    I'm sure developers would be really happy to have to buy a >$5000 Itanic Mac to test their triple-fat binaries.



    HP co-invented Itanic and even they canceled their Itanic workstations.
Sign In or Register to comment.