Clearly you must have had problems in school grasping facts and reality. The reports clearly indicate that the machines have gained nothing from this update as far as CPU performance goes. For many of us that CPU performance is pretty good as some things will never be speed up via GPU processing.
Which brings up an interesting point, I expect in the future that we will see many reports of much better graphical performance on the new machines. That is all well and good if it applies to the way you use the machine, if not it is just a way to detract from the fact that each new iMac sold these days is in effect grossly outdated hardware. In a nut shell you are paying for 2 year old CPU performance.
Dave
You misread the article, then you spout off like you actually know something.
GPUs actually handle more tasks than just graphics these days. And even more so with the new MacOS coming out soon. Read your dang Appleinsider!
Thus performance of the CPU alone is not the measure of the machine.
Having slapped you down... I will say this update is a bit underwhelming...
I made a movie with iMovie and encoded with iDVD. The movie was 1-2 minutes long but I encoded with iDVD to play on my TV. With my C2D MBP (2.16ghz) it took 20 minutes! I want an ATV just to avoid this hassle.
2 hour handbrake rips take about 2.5 hrs to complete. A friend has a last gen octo core MP and says 2 hr movies take him 20 minutes.
I can easily use a more powerful Mac. Alas, the only one that really offers the performance I desire is the Mac Pro and its not in my budget.
The trick is knowing where and when to look for heavily discounted stock of previous generation kit. That's where the value of money is.
About five months after the 2nd generation Mac Pro hit the shelves, I stumbled upon a reseller that was having problems shifting their remaining stocks of the 1st generation Mac Pro. I knew from previous experience that there was no real-world benefit to me from the additional four cores present in the 8-core machine, so I decided to purchase a brand new, unopened 1st generation machine that was marked down from £1,799 to £999. Sweet.
After about two weeks of trawling through Ebay, I managed to secure another six DIMMs that were identical to the two already in the machine (Hynix). A couple of £45 500GB 7200rpm drives later, and I had a quad-core workstation with 8GB of RAM and a 1TB RAID 0 array. Pretty sweet rig for £1,249 all in. And by the time I claimed the VAT back I had only paid £1,063.
A few months ago I sold my 8-core machine, because frankly, the souped-up 4-core machine was performing so well that holding on to the 8-core was a complete waste of money. My only regret is that I didn't buy two of the discounted 4-core machines when I had the chance!
If I were you, I'd be out looking for stocks of the 8-core machine right now. It may be a bit early, but there will be pockets of retailers who are struggling to shift their current stocks because everyone thinks that the 3rd generation Mac Pros are twice as fast again.
I'm still laughing up my sleeve when I compare the performance that my Mac Pro gives me compared to the iMacs etc. I hope you to will be able to pick up a bargain, and enjoy the same level of value for money as I have...
"Steve" has been the problem since 2005. He decided to kill the consumer affordable PowerMac desktop line and made people choose between an expensive non-upgradeable All-in-One (using laptop parts) or an insanely expensive mega "Pro" line. Steve was fine prior to 2005, when Apple offered a reasonable selection (iMacs for the cheap end, low-end PowerMacs for mid-range, high-end PowerMacs for the "professionals"). Unfortunately, they decided to turn Apple from the fun, alternative computer to a high end fashion brand like Gucci. Why not make higher profits on fewer items sold to a smaller demographic? Great for Apple shareholders, bad for the average person. Their market share has barely grown, despite people being fed up with Windows and not being locked into Windows like they were in the 90's.
Anyway, this is still the work of Steve. The early 2000's Steve was great, but things have changed. I honestly can't wait for him to go now.
Couldn't have said it better myself. I had a circa 2003 eMac (decent machine for what the price was, and what you could do with it!) and in that era, it was about making the computer fun again. It was about making it easier, making it do more. The idea was to break away from Windows beige (1998 iMacs rocked!) and focus on creativity. Now, with this huge focus on "thin", it is the next clothing label. Hardware is the same (though a little outdated) than any other PC out there. True, software makes a difference. But again, you are paying for style, not substance like you used to.
Someone's gotta reign Apple back in. It's going to loose more and more people with updates like this (or lack of updates... the mini not being updated till now for HOW long?). It already lost one customer. The only Apple product I use now is a G4 Mac mini as a home server (which it does very well). I sold my other Apple machines with the newer ones showing signs of heat issues. I used to recommend Apple products. These days I only recommend them to those in the Film/Recording/Media industries. And even then, it still depends.
So sad... I used to like the company. They just drove me away with their practices.
Exactly! Within 6 months, these new updates that are seen as marginal will be seen as something quite different!
Headlines could read something like, "Snow Leopard just made your 6-12 month old Mac brand new!".
Speed increases across the board will be huge in most real-world computing scenarios. The combination between Grand Central and OpenCL will be a one/two punch. Grand Central will increase speed of any multi-core machine (most likely Intel only), while OpenCL will add onto Grand Central's advantages and increase computational speed in most programs on machines with video cards supporting OpenCL (this iMac/Mac mini update and probably the previous iMac update as well).
As you may tell, I'm really looking forward to Snow Leopard!
"Steve" has been the problem since 2005. He decided to kill the consumer affordable PowerMac desktop line and made people choose between an expensive non-upgradeable All-in-One (using laptop parts) or an insanely expensive mega "Pro" line. Steve was fine prior to 2005, when Apple offered a reasonable selection (iMacs for the cheap end, low-end PowerMacs for mid-range, high-end PowerMacs for the "professionals"). Unfortunately, they decided to turn Apple from the fun, alternative computer to a high end fashion brand like Gucci. Why not make higher profits on fewer items sold to a smaller demographic? Great for Apple shareholders, bad for the average person. Their market share has barely grown, despite people being fed up with Windows and not being locked into Windows like they were in the 90's.
Anyway, this is still the work of Steve. The early 2000's Steve was great, but things have changed. I honestly can't wait for him to go now.
Couldn't have said it better myself. I had a circa 2003 eMac (decent machine for what the price was, and what you could do with it!) and in that era, it was about making the computer fun again. It was about making it easier, making it do more. The idea was to break away from Windows beige (1998 iMacs rocked!) and focus on creativity. Now, with this huge focus on "thin", it is the next clothing label. Hardware is the same (though a little outdated) than any other PC out there. True, software makes a difference. But again, you are paying for style, not substance like you used to.
Someone's gotta reign Apple back in. It's going to loose more and more people with updates like this (or lack of updates... the mini not being updated till now for HOW long?). It already lost one customer. The only Apple product I use now is a G4 Mac mini as a home server (which it does very well). I sold my other Apple machines with the newer ones showing signs of heat issues. I used to recommend Apple products. These days I only recommend them to those in the Film/Recording/Media industries. And even then, it still depends.
So sad... I used to like the company. They just drove me away with their practices.
I competely understood everything that was said here. Remember where the tower used to be? A consumer product?
Steve HAS lost the plot on the Mac desktop. The most insightful post on Apple here in ages.
Style over substance at insane prices. What happened to insanely great?
Design and form over function and denying consumers cheaper, higher performing alternatives.
Not quite - they didn't test the NEW 3.06 GHz iMac.
Actually, Primate Labs didn't test any hardware. They just gathered the results from subscribers and compare them. http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/
Waiting for a call back from John. The only thing I have is a cell phone number, i.e., 519-5090-3829, and know that they reside in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. Same home for RIM.
Again, previous benchmark posting from Primate Labs only seem to confirm that the higher CPU number the higher the benchmark score. As we can see, it doesn't appear that there is any significant difference in the score numbers. However, based on the fact that every following Macworld hardware review contradicts to some degree, the value of the benchmark score as defined in Primate Labs particular protocol.
"If you’re unfamiliar with Geekbench and how it measures performance, a score of 1000 is the score a Power Mac G5 @ 1.6GHz would receive. Higher scores are better. Also, Geekbench 2 only measures processor and memory performance which is why models with the same processors but different video cards have roughly the same score."
What I would be looking at is the benchmarks that Macworld, Engaget, etc., will report relative to my needs, whether it be video/audio editing or gaming for example.
Next, I would like, if possible, get real time hands on and review respected professional comprehensive benchmark testing*. Not the off-the-wall idiots posting that profess just how stupid one can be and certainly NOT Primate Labs singualar clock speed tables.
I'm still laughing up my sleeve when I compare the performance that my Mac Pro gives me compared to the iMacs etc. I hope you to will be able to pick up a bargain, and enjoy the same level of value for money as I have...
The trick is knowing where and when to look for heavily discounted stock of previous generation kit. That's where the value of money is.
About five months after the 2nd generation Mac Pro hit the shelves, I stumbled upon a reseller that was having problems shifting their remaining stocks of the 1st generation Mac Pro. I knew from previous experience that there was no real-world benefit to me from the additional four cores present in the 8-core machine, so I decided to purchase a brand new, unopened 1st generation machine that was marked down from £1,799 to £999. Sweet.
After about two weeks of trawling through Ebay, I managed to secure another six DIMMs that were identical to the two already in the machine (Hynix). A couple of £45 500GB 7200rpm drives later, and I had a quad-core workstation with 8GB of RAM and a 1TB RAID 0 array. Pretty sweet rig for £1,249 all in. And by the time I claimed the VAT back I had only paid £1,063.
A few months ago I sold my 8-core machine, because frankly, the souped-up 4-core machine was performing so well that holding on to the 8-core was a complete waste of money. My only regret is that I didn't buy two of the discounted 4-core machines when I had the chance!
If I were you, I'd be out looking for stocks of the 8-core machine right now. It may be a bit early, but there will be pockets of retailers who are struggling to shift their current stocks because everyone thinks that the 3rd generation Mac Pros are twice as fast again.
I'm still laughing up my sleeve when I compare the performance that my Mac Pro gives me compared to the iMacs etc. I hope you to will be able to pick up a bargain, and enjoy the same level of value for money as I have...
I've never really considered a Mac Pro. Maybe I will.
Oddly enough I LIKE the form factor of the iMac. It would fit nicely in our house in the location I have in mind.
I guess I'll start looking on ebay for a single processor Mac Pro. They almost never turn up as a refurb at the Apple web site.
The distinctly mixed reception to all this "new" hardware here and across forums underscores why it was not only not released at MacWorld, but quietly as well.
One hopes it's a placeholder for a post Snow Leopard and new gen CPU refresh within 6 months, but Apple doesn't typically change SKU's with major rearchitecting that often.
Geekbench is a sorry application to test with, honestly. It only tests CPU speed. Xbench is a TRUE testing platform as all aspects of the system including drives and memory are tested.
GB is good to test CPU's, not systems.
Should also note that performance did increase, power consumption decreased across the line make these machines more watt/performance better.
Instead of replacing my G5 iMac, I ordered a 15" MBPro (unibody refurb), and will look to the next iMac refresh for a reason to upgrade my G5. I need an Intel Mac now to start iPhone development.
The good news - the MBPro arrived within 24 hours.
The bad news - it was DOA. Or pretty close. Rebooted every couple of minutes and the iSight wasn't working.
Stunning piece of mechanical engineering though. Looking forward to getting a working one ;-)
At $599, on paper you coyodnhave thrown in a entry i7. Why not, they bumped the GPU and realize laptops sell more and now, in some regard offerva machine with girewirenand decent audio video ( stop waiting for benchmarks), camcorder and slight possibility apple didn't cripple it. If so you'll see these in edit bays servers farms audio bay. So why not an entry level 7 chip. They are not xpensive and wouldhavenmade the mini one killer machine that is not portable but very strong. Woulndnhave sold millions. Think of all the promsumernmusicians,editors, mom and pop 1 to 1 users and all the IT users fir target mode. What could have been more epic will porbanly be an eclipse. Typing=iPhone
If I wanted a tower, I'da bought a tower eh? I bought the latest mini for java and iPhone development and some light gaming. No, I don't need to wait for benchmarks...it should perform slightly worse than the latest Macbook and slightly better than my 2006 MBP.
For $599 and a 4GB ram upgrade. That's great.
Why no entry i7 chip? Because then it wouldn't be a mini would it? At best shuttle sized and rather loud and more expensive.
Apple didn't cripple anything. I debunked that in the other thread.
I've never really considered a Mac Pro. Maybe I will.
Oddly enough I LIKE the form factor of the iMac. It would fit nicely in our house in the location I have in mind.
I guess I'll start looking on ebay for a single processor Mac Pro. They almost never turn up as a refurb at the Apple web site.
I've had the best luck finding marked down stock in large chain stores. Ever so often you'll find a location where those in charge are clueless about the latest Mac developments to the extent that they've kept the older generation of product at full price. These sort of locations often try to mark the product down a little, and when it still doesn't sell they slash the price in order to clear what is now really outdated stock. Of course it's only outdated in theory, in practice it can often enjoy a really long and productive life.
I suspect you won't be so lucky if you deal with Apple directly, or with smaller more switched-on dealers.
What's your problem? Didn't you read the other's calling this a pathetic update? This is the first time I've mentioned this iMac update. And for future reference, your should be spelled you're.
That completely misused apostrophe is ironic, right?
I've had the best luck finding marked down stock in large chain stores. Ever so often you'll find a location where those in charge are clueless about the latest Mac developments to the extent that they've kept the older generation of product at full price. These sort of locations often try to mark the product down a little, and when it still doesn't sell they slash the price in order to clear what is now really outdated stock. Of course it's only outdated in theory, in practice it can often enjoy a really long and productive life.
I suspect you won't be so lucky if you deal with Apple directly, or with smaller more switched-on dealers.
There aren't many places in Kentucky that carry Mac hardware.
There's an Apple store in Louisville and Best Buys. The Best Buys don't carry Mac Pros, AFAIK.
The idea of a Mac Pro is growing on me. I'd rather have too much machine rather than too little.
There aren't many places in Kentucky that carry Mac hardware.
There's an Apple store in Louisville and Best Buys. The Best Buys don't carry Mac Pros, AFAIK.
The idea of a Mac Pro is growing on me. I'd rather have too much machine rather than too little.
The more machine you get, the longer it will be viable. You won't grumble if FW 3200 comes out and you want it, because you will just pick up a board. With Express 2 standard now, newer graphics cards should work as well.
If your monitor breaks down, you can get a temporary one.
Four FW 800 ports and I believe five USB 2 ports.
If you really need RAM, it's pretty cheap at OWC, and it's reliable.
My opinion is that apple is just restuffing the same old stuff to show those products are still alive before a real update when Snow Leopard comes out..
oh wait thats probably just me fantasizing again
I don't doubt that the iMacs will be updated sooner than later but I'm wondering how long it will take for Apple to move the mini to the Nehalem architecture.
I hope we're not talking two more years for that to happen though that is possible.
I might just upgrade to iLife, maybe the new OS and stick it out with my current mini for a while, hoping that this time next year we'll see a really impressive upgrade of the mini.
I hope we're not talking two more years for that to happen though that is possible.
I think that 18 months or more is to be expected on Mac Mini updates. If Snow Leopard will speed up the Mac Mini even more then Apple will have even less reason to push it to newer architecture. I think if you want a Mini and you want it to be current, for a Mini, then you'll need to buy now.
I don't doubt that the iMacs will be updated sooner than later but I'm wondering how long it will take for Apple to move the mini to the Nehalem architecture.
I hope we're not talking two more years for that to happen though that is possible.
I might just upgrade to iLife, maybe the new OS and stick it out with my current mini for a while, hoping that this time next year we'll see a really impressive upgrade of the mini.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I think that 18 months or more is to be expected on Mac Mini updates. If Snow Leopard will speed up the Mac Mini even more then Apple will have even less reason to push it to newer architecture. I think if you want a Mini and you want it to be current, for a Mini, then you'll need to buy now.
I would think the new mini would take better advantage of iLife too, given how much Apple uses GPU acceleration for their photo and video software. I wonder if it's the cheapest computer to ever have Firewire 800 out of the box.
Comments
Clearly you must have had problems in school grasping facts and reality. The reports clearly indicate that the machines have gained nothing from this update as far as CPU performance goes. For many of us that CPU performance is pretty good as some things will never be speed up via GPU processing.
Which brings up an interesting point, I expect in the future that we will see many reports of much better graphical performance on the new machines. That is all well and good if it applies to the way you use the machine, if not it is just a way to detract from the fact that each new iMac sold these days is in effect grossly outdated hardware. In a nut shell you are paying for 2 year old CPU performance.
Dave
You misread the article, then you spout off like you actually know something.
GPUs actually handle more tasks than just graphics these days. And even more so with the new MacOS coming out soon. Read your dang Appleinsider!
Thus performance of the CPU alone is not the measure of the machine.
Having slapped you down... I will say this update is a bit underwhelming...
I made a movie with iMovie and encoded with iDVD. The movie was 1-2 minutes long but I encoded with iDVD to play on my TV. With my C2D MBP (2.16ghz) it took 20 minutes! I want an ATV just to avoid this hassle.
2 hour handbrake rips take about 2.5 hrs to complete. A friend has a last gen octo core MP and says 2 hr movies take him 20 minutes.
I can easily use a more powerful Mac. Alas, the only one that really offers the performance I desire is the Mac Pro and its not in my budget.
The trick is knowing where and when to look for heavily discounted stock of previous generation kit. That's where the value of money is.
About five months after the 2nd generation Mac Pro hit the shelves, I stumbled upon a reseller that was having problems shifting their remaining stocks of the 1st generation Mac Pro. I knew from previous experience that there was no real-world benefit to me from the additional four cores present in the 8-core machine, so I decided to purchase a brand new, unopened 1st generation machine that was marked down from £1,799 to £999. Sweet.
After about two weeks of trawling through Ebay, I managed to secure another six DIMMs that were identical to the two already in the machine (Hynix). A couple of £45 500GB 7200rpm drives later, and I had a quad-core workstation with 8GB of RAM and a 1TB RAID 0 array. Pretty sweet rig for £1,249 all in. And by the time I claimed the VAT back I had only paid £1,063.
A few months ago I sold my 8-core machine, because frankly, the souped-up 4-core machine was performing so well that holding on to the 8-core was a complete waste of money. My only regret is that I didn't buy two of the discounted 4-core machines when I had the chance!
If I were you, I'd be out looking for stocks of the 8-core machine right now. It may be a bit early, but there will be pockets of retailers who are struggling to shift their current stocks because everyone thinks that the 3rd generation Mac Pros are twice as fast again.
I'm still laughing up my sleeve when I compare the performance that my Mac Pro gives me compared to the iMacs etc. I hope you to will be able to pick up a bargain, and enjoy the same level of value for money as I have...
"Steve" has been the problem since 2005. He decided to kill the consumer affordable PowerMac desktop line and made people choose between an expensive non-upgradeable All-in-One (using laptop parts) or an insanely expensive mega "Pro" line. Steve was fine prior to 2005, when Apple offered a reasonable selection (iMacs for the cheap end, low-end PowerMacs for mid-range, high-end PowerMacs for the "professionals"). Unfortunately, they decided to turn Apple from the fun, alternative computer to a high end fashion brand like Gucci. Why not make higher profits on fewer items sold to a smaller demographic? Great for Apple shareholders, bad for the average person. Their market share has barely grown, despite people being fed up with Windows and not being locked into Windows like they were in the 90's.
Anyway, this is still the work of Steve. The early 2000's Steve was great, but things have changed. I honestly can't wait for him to go now.
Couldn't have said it better myself. I had a circa 2003 eMac (decent machine for what the price was, and what you could do with it!) and in that era, it was about making the computer fun again. It was about making it easier, making it do more. The idea was to break away from Windows beige (1998 iMacs rocked!) and focus on creativity. Now, with this huge focus on "thin", it is the next clothing label. Hardware is the same (though a little outdated) than any other PC out there. True, software makes a difference. But again, you are paying for style, not substance like you used to.
Someone's gotta reign Apple back in. It's going to loose more and more people with updates like this (or lack of updates... the mini not being updated till now for HOW long?). It already lost one customer. The only Apple product I use now is a G4 Mac mini as a home server (which it does very well). I sold my other Apple machines with the newer ones showing signs of heat issues. I used to recommend Apple products. These days I only recommend them to those in the Film/Recording/Media industries. And even then, it still depends.
So sad... I used to like the company. They just drove me away with their practices.
Snow Leopard Grand Central.
Exactly! Within 6 months, these new updates that are seen as marginal will be seen as something quite different!
Headlines could read something like, "Snow Leopard just made your 6-12 month old Mac brand new!".
Speed increases across the board will be huge in most real-world computing scenarios. The combination between Grand Central and OpenCL will be a one/two punch. Grand Central will increase speed of any multi-core machine (most likely Intel only), while OpenCL will add onto Grand Central's advantages and increase computational speed in most programs on machines with video cards supporting OpenCL (this iMac/Mac mini update and probably the previous iMac update as well).
As you may tell, I'm really looking forward to Snow Leopard!
Quote:
Originally Posted by poxonyou
"Steve" has been the problem since 2005. He decided to kill the consumer affordable PowerMac desktop line and made people choose between an expensive non-upgradeable All-in-One (using laptop parts) or an insanely expensive mega "Pro" line. Steve was fine prior to 2005, when Apple offered a reasonable selection (iMacs for the cheap end, low-end PowerMacs for mid-range, high-end PowerMacs for the "professionals"). Unfortunately, they decided to turn Apple from the fun, alternative computer to a high end fashion brand like Gucci. Why not make higher profits on fewer items sold to a smaller demographic? Great for Apple shareholders, bad for the average person. Their market share has barely grown, despite people being fed up with Windows and not being locked into Windows like they were in the 90's.
Anyway, this is still the work of Steve. The early 2000's Steve was great, but things have changed. I honestly can't wait for him to go now.
Couldn't have said it better myself. I had a circa 2003 eMac (decent machine for what the price was, and what you could do with it!) and in that era, it was about making the computer fun again. It was about making it easier, making it do more. The idea was to break away from Windows beige (1998 iMacs rocked!) and focus on creativity. Now, with this huge focus on "thin", it is the next clothing label. Hardware is the same (though a little outdated) than any other PC out there. True, software makes a difference. But again, you are paying for style, not substance like you used to.
Someone's gotta reign Apple back in. It's going to loose more and more people with updates like this (or lack of updates... the mini not being updated till now for HOW long?). It already lost one customer. The only Apple product I use now is a G4 Mac mini as a home server (which it does very well). I sold my other Apple machines with the newer ones showing signs of heat issues. I used to recommend Apple products. These days I only recommend them to those in the Film/Recording/Media industries. And even then, it still depends.
So sad... I used to like the company. They just drove me away with their practices.
I competely understood everything that was said here. Remember where the tower used to be? A consumer product?
Steve HAS lost the plot on the Mac desktop. The most insightful post on Apple here in ages.
Style over substance at insane prices. What happened to insanely great?
Design and form over function and denying consumers cheaper, higher performing alternatives.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Not quite - they didn't test the NEW 3.06 GHz iMac.
Actually, Primate Labs didn't test any hardware. They just gathered the results from subscribers and compare them. http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/
Waiting for a call back from John. The only thing I have is a cell phone number, i.e., 519-5090-3829, and know that they reside in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. Same home for RIM.
Again, previous benchmark posting from Primate Labs only seem to confirm that the higher CPU number the higher the benchmark score. As we can see, it doesn't appear that there is any significant difference in the score numbers. However, based on the fact that every following Macworld hardware review contradicts to some degree, the value of the benchmark score as defined in Primate Labs particular protocol. What I would be looking at is the benchmarks that Macworld, Engaget, etc., will report relative to my needs, whether it be video/audio editing or gaming for example.
Next, I would like, if possible, get real time hands on and review respected professional comprehensive benchmark testing*. Not the off-the-wall idiots posting that profess just how stupid one can be and certainly NOT Primate Labs singualar clock speed tables.
I'm still laughing up my sleeve when I compare the performance that my Mac Pro gives me compared to the iMacs etc. I hope you to will be able to pick up a bargain, and enjoy the same level of value for money as I have...
Canny customer. Shrewd.
Lemon Bon Bon.
The trick is knowing where and when to look for heavily discounted stock of previous generation kit. That's where the value of money is.
About five months after the 2nd generation Mac Pro hit the shelves, I stumbled upon a reseller that was having problems shifting their remaining stocks of the 1st generation Mac Pro. I knew from previous experience that there was no real-world benefit to me from the additional four cores present in the 8-core machine, so I decided to purchase a brand new, unopened 1st generation machine that was marked down from £1,799 to £999. Sweet.
After about two weeks of trawling through Ebay, I managed to secure another six DIMMs that were identical to the two already in the machine (Hynix). A couple of £45 500GB 7200rpm drives later, and I had a quad-core workstation with 8GB of RAM and a 1TB RAID 0 array. Pretty sweet rig for £1,249 all in. And by the time I claimed the VAT back I had only paid £1,063.
A few months ago I sold my 8-core machine, because frankly, the souped-up 4-core machine was performing so well that holding on to the 8-core was a complete waste of money. My only regret is that I didn't buy two of the discounted 4-core machines when I had the chance!
If I were you, I'd be out looking for stocks of the 8-core machine right now. It may be a bit early, but there will be pockets of retailers who are struggling to shift their current stocks because everyone thinks that the 3rd generation Mac Pros are twice as fast again.
I'm still laughing up my sleeve when I compare the performance that my Mac Pro gives me compared to the iMacs etc. I hope you to will be able to pick up a bargain, and enjoy the same level of value for money as I have...
I've never really considered a Mac Pro. Maybe I will.
Oddly enough I LIKE the form factor of the iMac. It would fit nicely in our house in the location I have in mind.
I guess I'll start looking on ebay for a single processor Mac Pro. They almost never turn up as a refurb at the Apple web site.
One hopes it's a placeholder for a post Snow Leopard and new gen CPU refresh within 6 months, but Apple doesn't typically change SKU's with major rearchitecting that often.
Kind of puzzling all in all.
GB is good to test CPU's, not systems.
Should also note that performance did increase, power consumption decreased across the line make these machines more watt/performance better.
Instead of replacing my G5 iMac, I ordered a 15" MBPro (unibody refurb), and will look to the next iMac refresh for a reason to upgrade my G5. I need an Intel Mac now to start iPhone development.
The good news - the MBPro arrived within 24 hours.
The bad news - it was DOA. Or pretty close. Rebooted every couple of minutes and the iSight wasn't working.
Stunning piece of mechanical engineering though. Looking forward to getting a working one ;-)
At $599, on paper you coyodnhave thrown in a entry i7. Why not, they bumped the GPU and realize laptops sell more and now, in some regard offerva machine with girewirenand decent audio video ( stop waiting for benchmarks), camcorder and slight possibility apple didn't cripple it. If so you'll see these in edit bays servers farms audio bay. So why not an entry level 7 chip. They are not xpensive and wouldhavenmade the mini one killer machine that is not portable but very strong. Woulndnhave sold millions. Think of all the promsumernmusicians,editors, mom and pop 1 to 1 users and all the IT users fir target mode. What could have been more epic will porbanly be an eclipse. Typing=iPhone
If I wanted a tower, I'da bought a tower eh? I bought the latest mini for java and iPhone development and some light gaming. No, I don't need to wait for benchmarks...it should perform slightly worse than the latest Macbook and slightly better than my 2006 MBP.
For $599 and a 4GB ram upgrade. That's great.
Why no entry i7 chip? Because then it wouldn't be a mini would it? At best shuttle sized and rather loud and more expensive.
Apple didn't cripple anything. I debunked that in the other thread.
I've never really considered a Mac Pro. Maybe I will.
Oddly enough I LIKE the form factor of the iMac. It would fit nicely in our house in the location I have in mind.
I guess I'll start looking on ebay for a single processor Mac Pro. They almost never turn up as a refurb at the Apple web site.
I've had the best luck finding marked down stock in large chain stores. Ever so often you'll find a location where those in charge are clueless about the latest Mac developments to the extent that they've kept the older generation of product at full price. These sort of locations often try to mark the product down a little, and when it still doesn't sell they slash the price in order to clear what is now really outdated stock. Of course it's only outdated in theory, in practice it can often enjoy a really long and productive life.
I suspect you won't be so lucky if you deal with Apple directly, or with smaller more switched-on dealers.
Only she they went to intel did thy improve.
whatever language + Software you are translating from/with into Olde English isn't working so great.
What's your problem? Didn't you read the other's calling this a pathetic update? This is the first time I've mentioned this iMac update. And for future reference, your should be spelled you're.
That completely misused apostrophe is ironic, right?
Cheers
Jim
I've had the best luck finding marked down stock in large chain stores. Ever so often you'll find a location where those in charge are clueless about the latest Mac developments to the extent that they've kept the older generation of product at full price. These sort of locations often try to mark the product down a little, and when it still doesn't sell they slash the price in order to clear what is now really outdated stock. Of course it's only outdated in theory, in practice it can often enjoy a really long and productive life.
I suspect you won't be so lucky if you deal with Apple directly, or with smaller more switched-on dealers.
There aren't many places in Kentucky that carry Mac hardware.
There's an Apple store in Louisville and Best Buys. The Best Buys don't carry Mac Pros, AFAIK.
The idea of a Mac Pro is growing on me. I'd rather have too much machine rather than too little.
There aren't many places in Kentucky that carry Mac hardware.
There's an Apple store in Louisville and Best Buys. The Best Buys don't carry Mac Pros, AFAIK.
The idea of a Mac Pro is growing on me. I'd rather have too much machine rather than too little.
The more machine you get, the longer it will be viable. You won't grumble if FW 3200 comes out and you want it, because you will just pick up a board. With Express 2 standard now, newer graphics cards should work as well.
If your monitor breaks down, you can get a temporary one.
Four FW 800 ports and I believe five USB 2 ports.
If you really need RAM, it's pretty cheap at OWC, and it's reliable.
My opinion is that apple is just restuffing the same old stuff to show those products are still alive before a real update when Snow Leopard comes out..
oh wait thats probably just me fantasizing again
I don't doubt that the iMacs will be updated sooner than later but I'm wondering how long it will take for Apple to move the mini to the Nehalem architecture.
I hope we're not talking two more years for that to happen though that is possible.
I might just upgrade to iLife, maybe the new OS and stick it out with my current mini for a while, hoping that this time next year we'll see a really impressive upgrade of the mini.
I hope we're not talking two more years for that to happen though that is possible.
I think that 18 months or more is to be expected on Mac Mini updates. If Snow Leopard will speed up the Mac Mini even more then Apple will have even less reason to push it to newer architecture. I think if you want a Mini and you want it to be current, for a Mini, then you'll need to buy now.
I don't doubt that the iMacs will be updated sooner than later but I'm wondering how long it will take for Apple to move the mini to the Nehalem architecture.
I hope we're not talking two more years for that to happen though that is possible.
I might just upgrade to iLife, maybe the new OS and stick it out with my current mini for a while, hoping that this time next year we'll see a really impressive upgrade of the mini.
I think that 18 months or more is to be expected on Mac Mini updates. If Snow Leopard will speed up the Mac Mini even more then Apple will have even less reason to push it to newer architecture. I think if you want a Mini and you want it to be current, for a Mini, then you'll need to buy now.
I would think the new mini would take better advantage of iLife too, given how much Apple uses GPU acceleration for their photo and video software. I wonder if it's the cheapest computer to ever have Firewire 800 out of the box.