We sell both platforms and thus no Apple stuff but just the bare boxed Woodcrest are in the system. Maybe I'll actually get an ETA on when they "hope" to be delivered.
Personally I don't care whether they slap Conroes or Woodcrests into the Mac Pro line. I just want to see a better price tier in place that offers more reasonable pricing, preferably starting at the $1,499 price point. If Apple keeps raising the entry barrier on Pro systems as they have been they're going to insure the Mac Pro (like the PowerMac) remains a niche product line.
Let's see some nicely configured, modestly priced, mainstream desktops.
Personally I don't care whether they slap Conroes or Woodcrests into the Mac Pro line. I just want to see a better price tier in place that offers more reasonable pricing, preferably starting at the $1,499 price point. If Apple keeps raising the entry barrier on Pro systems as they have been they're going to insure the Mac Pro (like the PowerMac) remains a niche product line.
Let's see some nicely configured, modestly priced, mainstream desktops.
If they put Conroe chips in the Mac Pros, Apple will have no choice but to drop to $1,499 for an entry-level Pro tower. If they don't nobody's ever going to buy a Mac Pro, they'll all buy the 17" iMacs and a larger stand-alone screen to go with it.
Personally I don't care whether they slap Conroes or Woodcrests into the Mac Pro line. I just want to see a better price tier in place that offers more reasonable pricing, preferably starting at the $1,499 price point. If Apple keeps raising the entry barrier on Pro systems as they have been they're going to insure the Mac Pro (like the PowerMac) remains a niche product line.
Let's see some nicely configured, modestly priced, mainstream desktops.
They need to do both. Neither way alone is acceptable for most users.
There is hope that without water cooling, they can drop the price, or at least make up for the more expensive (than the G5) cpu's.
They need to do both. Neither way alone is acceptable for most users.
There is hope that without water cooling, they can drop the price, or at least make up for the more expensive (than the G5) cpu's.
I thought the water cooling system was only done on the most expensive Powermac. The cost of water cooling shouldn't affect the price of the cheaper systems because they don't use it on those systems.
I do think that there needs to be a Mac tower in the $1499 bracket but I wonder what they would do to make sure it's worth buying compared to an iMac but on the other hand, not canibalize their more expensive towers, which might have been a bigger factor. When the $1499 G5 was available, it didn't have a whole lot going for it in view of an iMac which includes a screen for not much more.
I thought the water cooling system was only done on the most expensive Powermac. The cost of water cooling shouldn't affect the price of the cheaper systems because they don't use it on those systems.
I do think that there needs to be a Mac tower in the $1499 bracket but I wonder what they would do to make sure it's worth buying compared to an iMac but on the other hand, not canibalize their more expensive towers, which might have been a bigger factor. When the $1499 G5 was available, it didn't have a whole lot going for it in view of an iMac which includes a screen for not much more.
I think Apple needs to offer more options to consumers now that people are have their eye on Apple.
With all the stores, glamour, popularity, brand recognition, etc it seems kind of crazy to only offer the average consumer 4 products(technically 3 if you consider MBPs to be over the level of the average consumer).
They could make the entry mac pros a different colour or a different hue of aluminum or something, but something's gotta give, only 1 computer with a 3.5" HD? Come on Apple.
Yup, we're back to the "nice reasonable Conroe or lower-ghz Woodcrest tower" in the $1500-2500 range. Because iMac is nice but one wants more power without having to settle for an all-in-one computer.
Classic desire now from a lot of people. I suspect the MacPros will still be aimed at the higher end. Apple just does not want to do the "affordable Mac midi-tower"
I thought the water cooling system was only done on the most expensive Powermac. The cost of water cooling shouldn't affect the price of the cheaper systems because they don't use it on those systems.
I do think that there needs to be a Mac tower in the $1499 bracket but I wonder what they would do to make sure it's worth buying compared to an iMac but on the other hand, not canibalize their more expensive towers, which might have been a bigger factor. When the $1499 G5 was available, it didn't have a whole lot going for it in view of an iMac which includes a screen for not much more.
When they went to water cooling all of the two chip systems used it. I don't remember if all of the latter machines with the dual core chips did though.
I don't understand why people think that a $1,500 MacPro will cannibalize the iMac. These are very different machines, for very different audiences. While it's true that SOME people might switch from one to the other, it's a minor problem. Most people who want an iMac want it because it is what it is. They don't want a tower. They don't want a Mini either, which would be the closest substitute. And most people who buy a tower buy that because of what IT is. They don't want an iMac.
Even if the tower was priced at $1,250, it wouldn't compete except on a minor plain. The total cost would still be considerably more than the 20" iMac. The inconvenience to most people would remain, as would the much greater room that is required.
Insofar as it canibalizing their more expensive towers goes, people who need, and want them, still will. But, people who couldn't find the funds for one will now be able to.
In two years there won't be any Woodcrest. Intel will move on to the next microarchitecture as they have announced to do every two years ...
There will be woodcrest in two years, it just will be cheap enough to go in iMac. The developement costs are such that I doubt Intel will just say goodbye to woodcrest. It will just move down the food chain.
There will be woodcrest in two years, it just will be cheap enough to go in iMac. The developement costs are such that I doubt Intel will just say goodbye to woodcrest. It will just move down the food chain.
In two years woodcrest will be slow processor, and apple probably wont be using them anymore.
Comments
We sell both platforms and thus no Apple stuff but just the bare boxed Woodcrest are in the system. Maybe I'll actually get an ETA on when they "hope" to be delivered.
No new Macs in the system yet
Let's see some nicely configured, modestly priced, mainstream desktops.
Originally posted by MacRonin
Timing of now, Conroe in July & Merom in August makes me think:
MacPro tomorrow?
Updated iMacs/Mac minis in July?
And that leaves Merom in August, along with WWDC?
?and the brand new Mac tablet family (8", 13.3"& 17")?!
You heard it here?!
;^p
Just quoting myself since the posts seem all fracked up right now?
Originally posted by Foo Fighter
Personally I don't care whether they slap Conroes or Woodcrests into the Mac Pro line. I just want to see a better price tier in place that offers more reasonable pricing, preferably starting at the $1,499 price point. If Apple keeps raising the entry barrier on Pro systems as they have been they're going to insure the Mac Pro (like the PowerMac) remains a niche product line.
Let's see some nicely configured, modestly priced, mainstream desktops.
If they put Conroe chips in the Mac Pros, Apple will have no choice but to drop to $1,499 for an entry-level Pro tower. If they don't nobody's ever going to buy a Mac Pro, they'll all buy the 17" iMacs and a larger stand-alone screen to go with it.
Originally posted by Foo Fighter
Personally I don't care whether they slap Conroes or Woodcrests into the Mac Pro line. I just want to see a better price tier in place that offers more reasonable pricing, preferably starting at the $1,499 price point. If Apple keeps raising the entry barrier on Pro systems as they have been they're going to insure the Mac Pro (like the PowerMac) remains a niche product line.
Let's see some nicely configured, modestly priced, mainstream desktops.
They need to do both. Neither way alone is acceptable for most users.
There is hope that without water cooling, they can drop the price, or at least make up for the more expensive (than the G5) cpu's.
Originally posted by melgross
They need to do both. Neither way alone is acceptable for most users.
There is hope that without water cooling, they can drop the price, or at least make up for the more expensive (than the G5) cpu's.
I thought the water cooling system was only done on the most expensive Powermac. The cost of water cooling shouldn't affect the price of the cheaper systems because they don't use it on those systems.
I do think that there needs to be a Mac tower in the $1499 bracket but I wonder what they would do to make sure it's worth buying compared to an iMac but on the other hand, not canibalize their more expensive towers, which might have been a bigger factor. When the $1499 G5 was available, it didn't have a whole lot going for it in view of an iMac which includes a screen for not much more.
Originally posted by JeffDM
I thought the water cooling system was only done on the most expensive Powermac. The cost of water cooling shouldn't affect the price of the cheaper systems because they don't use it on those systems.
I do think that there needs to be a Mac tower in the $1499 bracket but I wonder what they would do to make sure it's worth buying compared to an iMac but on the other hand, not canibalize their more expensive towers, which might have been a bigger factor. When the $1499 G5 was available, it didn't have a whole lot going for it in view of an iMac which includes a screen for not much more.
I think Apple needs to offer more options to consumers now that people are have their eye on Apple.
With all the stores, glamour, popularity, brand recognition, etc it seems kind of crazy to only offer the average consumer 4 products(technically 3 if you consider MBPs to be over the level of the average consumer).
They could make the entry mac pros a different colour or a different hue of aluminum or something, but something's gotta give, only 1 computer with a 3.5" HD? Come on Apple.
That's why I think that life will find a way.
Classic desire now from a lot of people. I suspect the MacPros will still be aimed at the higher end. Apple just does not want to do the "affordable Mac midi-tower"
... a dual socket iMac, which would be VERY nice...
Way overkill, dude
Originally posted by JeffDM
I thought the water cooling system was only done on the most expensive Powermac. The cost of water cooling shouldn't affect the price of the cheaper systems because they don't use it on those systems.
I do think that there needs to be a Mac tower in the $1499 bracket but I wonder what they would do to make sure it's worth buying compared to an iMac but on the other hand, not canibalize their more expensive towers, which might have been a bigger factor. When the $1499 G5 was available, it didn't have a whole lot going for it in view of an iMac which includes a screen for not much more.
When they went to water cooling all of the two chip systems used it. I don't remember if all of the latter machines with the dual core chips did though.
I don't understand why people think that a $1,500 MacPro will cannibalize the iMac. These are very different machines, for very different audiences. While it's true that SOME people might switch from one to the other, it's a minor problem. Most people who want an iMac want it because it is what it is. They don't want a tower. They don't want a Mini either, which would be the closest substitute. And most people who buy a tower buy that because of what IT is. They don't want an iMac.
Even if the tower was priced at $1,250, it wouldn't compete except on a minor plain. The total cost would still be considerably more than the 20" iMac. The inconvenience to most people would remain, as would the much greater room that is required.
Insofar as it canibalizing their more expensive towers goes, people who need, and want them, still will. But, people who couldn't find the funds for one will now be able to.
Originally posted by sunilraman
Originally posted by melgross
... a dual socket iMac, which would be VERY nice...
Way overkill, dude
It wasn't serious.
Originally posted by melgross
It wasn't serious.
I bet in two years iMacs will have woodcrest chips in them.
Originally posted by backtomac
I bet in two years iMacs will have woodcrest chips in them.
In two years there won't be any Woodcrest. Intel will move on to the next microarchitecture as they have announced to do every two years ...
Originally posted by mwswami
In two years there won't be any Woodcrest. Intel will move on to the next microarchitecture as they have announced to do every two years ...
There will be woodcrest in two years, it just will be cheap enough to go in iMac. The developement costs are such that I doubt Intel will just say goodbye to woodcrest. It will just move down the food chain.
Originally posted by backtomac
There will be woodcrest in two years, it just will be cheap enough to go in iMac. The developement costs are such that I doubt Intel will just say goodbye to woodcrest. It will just move down the food chain.
In two years woodcrest will be slow processor, and apple probably wont be using them anymore.
1 - card reader
2 - second CD/DVD drive
3 - Blue-Ray/HD-DVD drive (when they come out)
Originally posted by Placebo
What's holding up the Mac Pros?
Do you not read these forums, or rember the things that you have discussed in here in the past month? You know the answer.
And actually no one has a woodcrest shipping that I am aware of. Other than intel itself.
Woodcrest only makes sense to use over Conroe if
A) You need Dual Socket motherboards
In a year we'll have Kenstfield and Covertown( Dual Conroe and Dual Woodcrest).
So if Apple wants a quad core system they'll just use Kenstfield or Clovertown. If they want a dual core system they'll us Conroe.