No, but I do *melt* cheese with my dual processor G5 Power Mac! Start playing 4 or 5 video tracks of real-time effects pre-render and watch the CPU temps skyrocket!
My guess: nothing. At least, not as one discrete machine. Apple is hewing to their core competence, which is building PCs or funny-looking PCish things like the Xserve. I don't see a price, but the only counter-offer I'd expect from Apple would involve a number of smaller machines and fiber channel cards.
If that's not quite what you need, well, Boxx is a niche company targeting your particular area of interest, and the Apexx 8 is their newest high-end offering. I'm really not surprised that a PC manufacturer has no ready answer for it.
If it does what you want there's no reason not to buy it. Not everything has to be a Mac.
Pro Video Editing is ready for Intel with Final Cut Pro.
Pro Photography is ready for Intel with Aperture.
Pro Audio Editing is ready for Intel with Logic Pro.
And as of May 23rd, Pro Graphic Design will be ready for Intel with Quark Xpress.
Anyone who thinks that Apple is going to deliberately lose six months of sales because of Adobe is crazy.
Apple will keep selling G5's simultaneously in a lonely area of the Apple Store for Adobe users. But restraining six months of pro sales momentum to help Adobe compete is simply not going to happen.
And as of May 23rd, Pro Graphic Design will be ready for Intel with Quark Xpress.
If Quark Xpress were the only application involved in professional graphic design, I would agree with you. But it's not. Photoshop is a linchpin of sorts, and a handful of other programs round out the standard tools of the trade.
Admittedly, Adobe products can be run under Rosetta, but for most designers, time is money, and they will continue to work with a tried and true setup (i.e. a dual or quad G5) as long as it benefits their bottom line.
I agree with you, but that's not going to stop Apple from shipping Pro systems.
I'm just saying that Apple will point to the availability of Xpress as a good reason to get the systems out. CS2 users will be told that G5s are available if they still want them.
Apple will not impact their pro earnings negatively to help Adobe.
If Quark Xpress were the only application involved in professional graphic design, I would agree with you. But it's not. Photoshop is a linchpin of sorts, and a handful of other programs round out the standard tools of the trade.
Admittedly, Adobe products can be run under Rosetta, but for most designers, time is money, and they will continue to work with a tried and true setup (i.e. a dual or quad G5) as long as it benefits their bottom line.
Not to mention that, from what I have seen, Photoshop takes a big hit under Rosetta, which kind of negates the reason for upgrading to a newer CPU. For most graphic professionals that is the most CPU intensive program that they use. I havent seen any banchmarks for Illustrator or InDesign. I would imagine that Illustrator would preform pretty well, though on my Dual 2.3 G5 InDesign can, at times, still feel pretty slow at times (not to mention that it makes my 20" monitor feel pretty small with all the pallets that I find I need to keep open). Don't forget that Adobe has grabbed around 50% (higher by now?) of the page layout market for InDesign. This means for about 50% of the print design market there will be no compelling reason to upgrade their computers untill Adobe comes out with Universal Bionary versions of their creative suite. For Web Design it's probably different but Adobe does now own Flash and Dreamweaver which are big programs in that market as well, and I havent seen a firm date for Universal Bionary versions of those either.
Even with all that, I'm finding it hard to keep from buying a new 20" iMac for home to replace my 450 Cube till I get a few bills paid down. I'm sure that no matter how slow photoshop is under rosetta it will be faster than it is on the Cube.
The rule of thumb is that anyone with a 1.2 Ghz G4 or under will see an improvement, even with Rosetta.
While InDesign has grabbed a chunk of the design market, it's important to remember that there are still a lot of shops with Quark.
Even Adobe showed this week that its worried about Quark Universal being out so far ahead of CS3. They've taken to hyping InDesign CS3 three quarters of a year before it sees the light of day.
The rule of thumb is that anyone with a 1.2 Ghz G4 or under will see an improvement, even with Rosetta.
While InDesign has grabbed a chunk of the design market, it's important to remember that there are still a lot of shops with Quark.
Even Adobe showed this week that its worried about Quark Universal being out so far ahead of CS3. They've taken to hyping InDesign CS3 three quarters of a year before it sees the light of day.
I know that Quark still has a good following, we use both at work and are still using 4.11 for some clients. InDesign has made some big inroads into the market, and it's not just becouse they were native for OS X first, but also becouse of the "Promise" that InCopy is bringing to streamline the production/editorial process of publications. I know that Quark has their own, but in my industry (book publishing) it has not been greated as well as InCopy/InDesign.
Edit: notice that the screen shots are from a PC, not a Mac.
Really.. Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign is running _just_fine_ on my MacBook Pro. I can't really tell that I'm running it emulated. I upgraded from a 1.5 GHz PowerBook G4 with _is_ faster when I really put it to the test, but as I said.. I am not niticing it in day to day work. I've been using these kinds om apps professionally for 10 years so I remember Phtoshop 2.5 on a Quadra 700... If someone says Photoshop is slow on a MacBook Pro the've havn't been using these apps for long.
And.. comming this fall is Mac Pro Quads with 4x 3 GHz Woodcrest-cores. 4 GB RAM.. I think this beast will be running Photoshop just fine. Uppgrading from _anything_ "G4" will be a boost and I think that most professionalls have that kind of equipment today. High end, bleeding edge professionals will have to wait of course but they already have G5 Quads and they will suffice until Adobe is ready.
This is a completely different switch than OS9 to OSX where Classic was a real and enduring pain. This transition is nothing more than stepping back a year in performance.. and comming next spring, we'll be lunging 4 steps forward. Quite nice.
Apple is not going to do a damn thing with a machine like that. The Apex 8 is $24,000.00+ machine. Even the Apex 4 is a fortune.
#1 Apple wont do it all in one box because they can already outperform it for less using one workstation, or server, and Xserve cluster nodes in a rack. Why bother. My opinion is BOXX is either trying to hard go back to the way of SGI, or those Apex models are for fools, and for show. I don't think they are fooling anyone with a machine like that. Everybody knows how to cluster a better render-farm for 1/10th the price. That's why SGI is dead.
Core 2 Duo still isn't multi processor capable, and will probably never be. Sossaman and Woodcrest, the only two chips based of the Yonah/Core Microarchitecture which are available soon are Xeon chips, and are capable of dual processors, but not more.
Core 2 Duo still isn't multi processor capable, and will probably never be. Sossaman and Woodcrest, the only two chips based of the Yonah/Core Microarchitecture which are available soon are Xeon chips, and are capable of dual processors, but not more.
Actually, I think Woodcrest & attending chipsets are actually good to go in octo configurations?
Apple is not going to do a damn thing with a machine like that. The Apex 8 is $24,000.00+ machine. Even the Apex 4 is a fortune.
#1 Apple wont do it all in one box because they can already outperform it for less using one workstation, or server, and Xserve cluster nodes in a rack. Why bother. My opinion is BOXX is either trying to hard go back to the way of SGI, or those Apex models are for fools, and for show. I don't think they are fooling anyone with a machine like that. Everybody knows how to cluster a better render-farm for 1/10th the price. That's why SGI is dead.
I think the machine is actually aimed at high-end powerusers looking for very very fast 2k solutions? It would just be a boon for a boutique DCC crew; but Apple blade server render farms would also be sweet, especially with stories on Pixar/Disney switching production facilities over by the tons?
And, it would be cool?!
Isn't that reason enough??!?
They spend umpteen millions turning a high-end foodcourt on 5th into the new Apple Mecca, why not drop some R&D on a low volume powerhouse of a workstation??!?
(and yeah, now I gotta plan a trip to NYC sometime in my life, to make my pilgrimage?)
Maybe the thing would have it's own built-in RDF generator?!
Comments
Originally posted by ecking
Ever tried grating cheese with one?
No, but I do *melt* cheese with my dual processor G5 Power Mac! Start playing 4 or 5 video tracks of real-time effects pre-render and watch the CPU temps skyrocket!
The Raised Bar in workstations?!
;^p
Originally posted by MacRonin
What is Apple going to offer to match this??!?
The Raised Bar in workstations?!
;^p
My guess: nothing. At least, not as one discrete machine. Apple is hewing to their core competence, which is building PCs or funny-looking PCish things like the Xserve. I don't see a price, but the only counter-offer I'd expect from Apple would involve a number of smaller machines and fiber channel cards.
If that's not quite what you need, well, Boxx is a niche company targeting your particular area of interest, and the Apexx 8 is their newest high-end offering. I'm really not surprised that a PC manufacturer has no ready answer for it.
If it does what you want there's no reason not to buy it. Not everything has to be a Mac.
Originally posted by Amorph
Everything has to be a Mac.
There, I fixed that for you?
;^)
Pro Photography is ready for Intel with Aperture.
Pro Audio Editing is ready for Intel with Logic Pro.
And as of May 23rd, Pro Graphic Design will be ready for Intel with Quark Xpress.
Anyone who thinks that Apple is going to deliberately lose six months of sales because of Adobe is crazy.
Apple will keep selling G5's simultaneously in a lonely area of the Apple Store for Adobe users. But restraining six months of pro sales momentum to help Adobe compete is simply not going to happen.
Originally posted by Frank777:
And as of May 23rd, Pro Graphic Design will be ready for Intel with Quark Xpress.
If Quark Xpress were the only application involved in professional graphic design, I would agree with you. But it's not. Photoshop is a linchpin of sorts, and a handful of other programs round out the standard tools of the trade.
Admittedly, Adobe products can be run under Rosetta, but for most designers, time is money, and they will continue to work with a tried and true setup (i.e. a dual or quad G5) as long as it benefits their bottom line.
I'm just saying that Apple will point to the availability of Xpress as a good reason to get the systems out. CS2 users will be told that G5s are available if they still want them.
Apple will not impact their pro earnings negatively to help Adobe.
originally posted by Frank777
Apple will not impact their pro earnings negatively to help Adobe.
Agreed. I'm with you.
Originally posted by Sybaritic
If Quark Xpress were the only application involved in professional graphic design, I would agree with you. But it's not. Photoshop is a linchpin of sorts, and a handful of other programs round out the standard tools of the trade.
Admittedly, Adobe products can be run under Rosetta, but for most designers, time is money, and they will continue to work with a tried and true setup (i.e. a dual or quad G5) as long as it benefits their bottom line.
Not to mention that, from what I have seen, Photoshop takes a big hit under Rosetta, which kind of negates the reason for upgrading to a newer CPU. For most graphic professionals that is the most CPU intensive program that they use. I havent seen any banchmarks for Illustrator or InDesign. I would imagine that Illustrator would preform pretty well, though on my Dual 2.3 G5 InDesign can, at times, still feel pretty slow at times (not to mention that it makes my 20" monitor feel pretty small with all the pallets that I find I need to keep open). Don't forget that Adobe has grabbed around 50% (higher by now?) of the page layout market for InDesign. This means for about 50% of the print design market there will be no compelling reason to upgrade their computers untill Adobe comes out with Universal Bionary versions of their creative suite. For Web Design it's probably different but Adobe does now own Flash and Dreamweaver which are big programs in that market as well, and I havent seen a firm date for Universal Bionary versions of those either.
Even with all that, I'm finding it hard to keep from buying a new 20" iMac for home to replace my 450 Cube till I get a few bills paid down. I'm sure that no matter how slow photoshop is under rosetta it will be faster than it is on the Cube.
While InDesign has grabbed a chunk of the design market, it's important to remember that there are still a lot of shops with Quark.
Even Adobe showed this week that its worried about Quark Universal being out so far ahead of CS3. They've taken to hyping InDesign CS3 three quarters of a year before it sees the light of day.
Originally posted by Frank777
The rule of thumb is that anyone with a 1.2 Ghz G4 or under will see an improvement, even with Rosetta.
While InDesign has grabbed a chunk of the design market, it's important to remember that there are still a lot of shops with Quark.
Even Adobe showed this week that its worried about Quark Universal being out so far ahead of CS3. They've taken to hyping InDesign CS3 three quarters of a year before it sees the light of day.
I know that Quark still has a good following, we use both at work and are still using 4.11 for some clients. InDesign has made some big inroads into the market, and it's not just becouse they were native for OS X first, but also becouse of the "Promise" that InCopy is bringing to streamline the production/editorial process of publications. I know that Quark has their own, but in my industry (book publishing) it has not been greated as well as InCopy/InDesign.
Edit: notice that the screen shots are from a PC, not a Mac.
And.. comming this fall is Mac Pro Quads with 4x 3 GHz Woodcrest-cores. 4 GB RAM.. I think this beast will be running Photoshop just fine. Uppgrading from _anything_ "G4" will be a boost and I think that most professionalls have that kind of equipment today. High end, bleeding edge professionals will have to wait of course but they already have G5 Quads and they will suffice until Adobe is ready.
This is a completely different switch than OS9 to OSX where Classic was a real and enduring pain. This transition is nothing more than stepping back a year in performance.. and comming next spring, we'll be lunging 4 steps forward. Quite nice.
Originally posted by MacRonin
What is Apple going to offer to match this??!?
The Raised Bar in workstations?!
;^p
Apple is not going to do a damn thing with a machine like that. The Apex 8 is $24,000.00+ machine. Even the Apex 4 is a fortune.
#1 Apple wont do it all in one box because they can already outperform it for less using one workstation, or server, and Xserve cluster nodes in a rack. Why bother. My opinion is BOXX is either trying to hard go back to the way of SGI, or those Apex models are for fools, and for show. I don't think they are fooling anyone with a machine like that. Everybody knows how to cluster a better render-farm for 1/10th the price. That's why SGI is dead.
Originally posted by Corey
I wonder how well a quad memron sysytem with a bunch of ram would work running Adobe stuff under Rosetta?
Not too well, seeing is how Merom is not designed for SMP?
(that means it can only support one multi-core CPU)
Originally posted by Myst
Low-end Mac Pro: 2x Conroe Duo @ 2.67 GHz
(Bumped in Sept/Oct to 2.93 Conroe Duo)
(Bumped in January to 3.33 Conroe XE Duo)
Middle of the Road: 2x Conroe Duo @ 2.93 GHz
(Bumped in Sept/Oct to 3.33 Conroe XE Duo)
(Bumped in January to 2x Quad Kentsfield)
Top of the line: 2x Woodcrest Duo @ 3.0 GHz
(Speed Bump in Sept/Oct)
(Bumped in January to 2x Quad Clovertown)
Core 2 Duo still isn't multi processor capable, and will probably never be. Sossaman and Woodcrest, the only two chips based of the Yonah/Core Microarchitecture which are available soon are Xeon chips, and are capable of dual processors, but not more.
Originally posted by Zandros
Core 2 Duo still isn't multi processor capable, and will probably never be. Sossaman and Woodcrest, the only two chips based of the Yonah/Core Microarchitecture which are available soon are Xeon chips, and are capable of dual processors, but not more.
Actually, I think Woodcrest & attending chipsets are actually good to go in octo configurations?
Originally posted by onlooker
Apple is not going to do a damn thing with a machine like that. The Apex 8 is $24,000.00+ machine. Even the Apex 4 is a fortune.
#1 Apple wont do it all in one box because they can already outperform it for less using one workstation, or server, and Xserve cluster nodes in a rack. Why bother. My opinion is BOXX is either trying to hard go back to the way of SGI, or those Apex models are for fools, and for show. I don't think they are fooling anyone with a machine like that. Everybody knows how to cluster a better render-farm for 1/10th the price. That's why SGI is dead.
I think the machine is actually aimed at high-end powerusers looking for very very fast 2k solutions? It would just be a boon for a boutique DCC crew; but Apple blade server render farms would also be sweet, especially with stories on Pixar/Disney switching production facilities over by the tons?
And, it would be cool?!
Isn't that reason enough??!?
They spend umpteen millions turning a high-end foodcourt on 5th into the new Apple Mecca, why not drop some R&D on a low volume powerhouse of a workstation??!?
(and yeah, now I gotta plan a trip to NYC sometime in my life, to make my pilgrimage?)
Maybe the thing would have it's own built-in RDF generator?!