I tend to agree with Kasper about Apple certifiying software and systems rather than implementing xG in their notebooks. The market is awash in USB dogles, tethered phones (minus the iPhone currently), sofware solutions (Novamedia, and Joikuspot). All of these solutions pose no inconvenience to the user. If I need to coonect via 3G to my network provider with my Mac, I simply pull out my phone, start Joikuspot, and put the phone back in my pocket. The computer and phone negotiate the connection via wifi and I am surfing. Done. The argument for a more integrated solution is a but unfounded in my opinion.
I currently use the Verizon USB Wireless dongle with very satisfactory results while out and about. It will be far better, in my opinion, to have an external device rather than an internal device for one major reason alluded to above: I can acquire a unit that works in Europe on a pay as you go plan and switch to the Verizon unit upon my return WITHOUT splitting the case. I can also upgrade as the technology evolves rather than having an obsolete computer after a minor tick upgrade in phone service.
I would wager that teethering will become available for the iPhone because AT&T does not wish to loose out on a single nickel of revenue. That option currently exists for my Blackberry on Verizon.
I currently use the Verizon USB Wireless dongle with very satisfactory results while out and about. It will be far better, in my opinion, to have an external device rather than an internal device for one major reason alluded to above: I can acquire a unit that works in Europe on a pay as you go plan and switch to the Verizon unit upon my return WITHOUT splitting the case. I can also upgrade as the technology evolves rather than having an obsolete computer after a minor tick upgrade in phone service.
I would wager that teethering will become available for the iPhone because AT&T does not wish to loose out on a single nickel of revenue. That option currently exists for my Blackberry on Verizon.
We have been over this a million times but I still find it hard to believe that US operators are still backward thinking and still charging for tethering. In Europe they simply see it as a data connection pure and simple.
Since ATT runs a wired network, what do you think it costs them to operate it versus their wireless network? ATT charges $20/month for 1.5mbps DSL in my area. If it is an additional $30 for the 3.6mbps 3G in my macbook there is definitely a case for purchasing a new laptop that has a subsidy and canceling my DSL and going wireless. Does anyone think that this would fly at ATT?
It is considerably more data per second than DVD or CD, but it's much slower than any HDD, it uses a lot more power, it's noisier, any write errors trash a disc and each disc is expensive. Buying a HDD for backup is considerably more ideal for a consumer.
I didn't think his post was real since it doesn't make sense. LTE, which isn't even a finalized standard to be in an iPod Shuffle?
its only recently that HDDs have become cheap enough to be used as archive media, but even that has its problems long term.
I remember my first single speed CD burner at £500 and that was a bargain! now I doubt if you could get "just" a CD writer any more, but CD/DVD burners are for peanuts.
Gee, they said the same thing about DVD when writers first came out.
There may be a difference this time though, I recall that CDs and DVDs had more capacity than a typical hard drive at that time it was introduced. That's not true with Blu-Ray. On the flip side, the drives were shockingly expensive, Blu-Ray drives went down in price very quickly.
Quote:
As far as write errors go, they trash CDs and DVDs as well.
I can't say I've had a write error of note in a long time for any optical media. The one time that I remember is when I hit cancel in the middle of a burn.
After digging around, It seems that there are two Productized versions. The Gobi 1000(PDF Warning) and Gobi 2000(PDF Warning).
Both support HSPA on 850MHz and 1900MHz for the Americas and 2100MHz for the rest of the world, quad-band GSM, and 800/1900 MHz CDMA/EVDO for carriers like Verizon.
The 2000 supports HSPA on 800MHz and 900MHz for places unknown to me, while the 1000 doesn't.
Other differences include the SMS systems for CDMA networks, the GPS subsystem, upload speeds on HSPA networks, and Windows 7 support.
Both use the Mini PCI Express interface.
Now here's my uninformed conjecture:
This seems like a near drop-in solution for Apple. It allows users to pick their carrier, and includes GPS. The GPS could be helpful with the addition of CoreLocation in Snow Leopard.
Stumbling blocks could include...
Trying to fit a WiFi Module and a cellular module in the same laptop. If I'm not mistaken, the current generation of Apple laptops only has one mini PCI Express slot. Can someone confirm this?
Apple would have to work out how to get appropriate firmware images to customers. Each EVDO network would require it's own. HSPA networks might require their own firmware as well, unless Apple feels like tearing apart brand new Systems to install SIM cards for every customer. Maybe carriers would start handing out CDs with firmware images on them.
Maybe we'd see some Apple design magic here and find a single WiFi/Bluetooth/Gobi module with a SIM slot under the battery.
Since ATT runs a wired network, what do you think it costs them to operate it versus their wireless network? ATT charges $20/month for 1.5mbps DSL in my area. If it is an additional $30 for the 3.6mbps 3G in my macbook there is definitely a case for purchasing a new laptop that has a subsidy and canceling my DSL and going wireless. Does anyone think that this would fly at ATT?
The wired networks are mostly paid for, even with their adding Fiber. That's one reason why they can offer services more cheaply. They, and other companies are spending far more upgrading their wireless networks.
AT&T and Verizon though, are spending big bucks on Fiber, either to the home in all cases with Verizon, or to the node in old areas, and to the home in new ones. But they charge a lot for those services. Those services do offer very high speeds though.
There may be a difference this time though, I recall that CDs and DVDs had more capacity than a typical hard drive at that time it was introduced. That's not true with Blu-Ray. On the flip side, the drives were shockingly expensive, Blu-Ray drives went down in price very quickly.
When CD writers first came out, the largest HDD was under 500 MB, while the CD offered 650 MB.
But the CD writer cost $6,000, and the disks were over $100 apiece for CD-R.
Not exactly a bargain. In todays dollars, far worse.
With DVD, the prices were about the same, but HDDs were much larger also.
It took years before either came down enough in cost to be useful, though still pretty expensive for even the top end consumer, and years more before they became affordable to the average user.
When I bought my Digital Audio model, the Pioneer 2x Writer was costing a bit over $1,000 as an OEM drive by itself, and disks cost $20. Apple dropped the price of the disks to $10, an outrageously low price at the time, meant to spur use.
Right now, you can buy BD writers for under $200, if you look around, and even the new 8x writers can be found for $350 or so. Disk prices have dropped to under $6 (per disk) for spindled 25 disk packages for 25 GB disks, and $11 (per disk) for a package of 50 GB versions, if, again, you look around.
Yes, HDDs are so much larger these days, that's true. But even 25 GB disks are far better for a SAFE storage of important material than are HDDs. And 25 GB is large enough for most HD video projects, which is something that can't be said about 8.5 GB DVDs.
I have friends who shoot fashion and other commercial goods. They generate 20 GB a day in files, sometimes more. They are mostly using BD now for offline storage.
Quote:
I can't say I've had a write error of note in a long time for any optical media. The one time that I remember is when I hit cancel in the middle of a burn.
It's not common, but every once in a while, I do get one.
BD doesn't seem to have any more problems from what I'm told from the people who use them every day.
Yeah, it was pretty pompous. Besides, cellular data on a Mac Pro? How wasted does one have to be to think that one up?
Stop thinking to have a modem built into a Mac. Look at the Kindle. Has one from Sprint !
What if this "modem" would go into Apple's new iPad - the 4 times bigger than the iPhone touchscreen netbook everyone is looking forward to?
Just to make an even bigger point: Just a few minutes ago Amazon introduced a new 9.7" Kindle. Look at it - add color and touch (take off the keyboard ;-) and you have the "new iPad". Men - I sure hope Apple can repeat the magic [of the iPhone intro] at WWDC.
Stop thinking to have a modem built into a Mac. Look at the Kindle. Has one from Sprint !
What if this "modem" would go into Apple's new iPad - the 4 times bigger than the iPhone touchscreen netbook everyone is looking forward to?
The Mac Pro isn't remotely portable so having a mobile data connection would be very atypical. I'm sure their someone who doesn't have DSL, fiber or coax internet in their area but somehow have 3G internet where this would be more apropos, but their are USB card for this already. The Kindle is a portable device and has GPRS, pre-EDGE cellular data, that is even pretty slow for DLing text-only eBooks, despite being a nice touch to the Kindle.
The Mac Pro isn't remotely portable so having a mobile data connection would be very atypical. I'm sure their someone who doesn't have DSL, fiber or coax internet in their area but somehow have 3G internet where this would be more apropos, but their are USB card for this already. The Kindle is a portable device and has GPRS, pre-EDGE cellular data, that is even pretty slow for DLing text-only eBooks, despite being a nice touch to the Kindle.
I think "isn't remotely portable" is a bit over the top. The machine is very portable. There are other machines which are more effortlessly portable, being lighter and smaller. I work from my 17" MBP from several locations a day. I wouldn't consider it a mobile-on-the-go platform by any means, but I trade the performance, screen size and HD storage against needing maintain network connections all the time when away from my desk, the iPhone handles that.
I think "isn't remotely portable" is a bit over the top.
If you are being pedantic, then yes it can be moved, but so can a mainframe or a house for that matter. The Mac Pro is a desktop PC and a large one at that. It's not meant to disconnected from it's peripherals and carted around town. It has no battery so it can't be used without being plugged in. I'd say that for all intents and purposes it "isn't remotely portable".
If you are being pedantic, then yes it can be moved, but so can a mainframe or a house for that matter. The Mac Pro is a desktop PC and a large one at that. It's not meant to disconnected from it's peripherals and carted around town. It has no battery so it can't be used without being plugged in. I'd say that for all intents and purposes it "isn't remotely portable".
That depends. A lot of guys who shoot fashion will lug, not only a laptop, but also a desktop with them.
These shoots all depend on generators for power, and inverters from the van battery, so power isn't a problem, and neither is a way of moving the equipment.
Remember that lighting is often used during daylight hours for fill and other tasks. So are back-up drives, even RAIDS.
You might not think of bringing a big piece of equipment, but many pros do. That's only in a certain class of work, where money is being spent. I don't expect the "pro" living on a small budget, working for small amounts of money to be able to do this.
That depends. A lot of guys who shoot fashion will lug, not only a laptop, but also a desktop with them.
These shoots all depend on generators for power, and inverters from the van battery, so power isn't a problem, and neither is a way of moving the equipment.
Remember that lighting is often used during daylight hours for fill and other tasks. So are back-up drives, even RAIDS.
You might not think of bringing a big piece of equipment, but many pros do. That's only in a certain class of work, where money is being spent. I don't expect the "pro" living on a small budget, working for small amounts of money to be able to do this.
I'm sure it happens. Those rumoured Google data centers Cringely used to talk about, the ones built into shipping containers are portable too. But the conversation was about wireless cards built into the Mac Pro. While I know some people will need WWAN in the Mac Pros and other large desktops I don't see it as common enough that Apple would offer it as an option. Only for their portable machines, err, machines that are designed to be portable for the typical consumer.
edit: I jut looked for PCIe WWAN cards for desktops but nary a one came up on Google Shopping. There are, of course, plenty of mini cards which could be paired with an adapter card, but that is all I can find. That tells me that the need is uncommon for desktop machines and/or that USB WWAN cards are more than sufficient.
That depends. A lot of guys who shoot fashion will lug, not only a laptop, but also a desktop with them.
These shoots all depend on generators for power, and inverters from the van battery, so power isn't a problem, and neither is a way of moving the equipment.
Remember that lighting is often used during daylight hours for fill and other tasks. So are back-up drives, even RAIDS.
You might not think of bringing a big piece of equipment, but many pros do. That's only in a certain class of work, where money is being spent. I don't expect the "pro" living on a small budget, working for small amounts of money to be able to do this.
I think that's kind of an edge case though.
A typical Macbook & MBP user most likely benefits a lot more from having built-in cellular wireless than a typical Mac Pro user. For me, it was kind of an expedition to bring the thing in to the Apple store to get them to replace the old ATI card on warranty. I even dug up an old luggage dolly just because it's an awkward size.
A Mac Pro user that really does need cellular wireless, such as in the situation that you related, probably isn't going to be so put off by having a USB stick or even a PCIe to Express Card 34 adapter in the back.
I'm sure it happens. Those rumoured Google data centers Cringely used to talk about, the ones built into shipping containers are portable too. But the conversation was about wireless cards built into the Mac Pro. While I know some people will need WWAN in the Mac Pros and other large desktops I don't see it as common enough that Apple would offer it as an option. Only for their portable machines, err, machines that are designed to be portable for the typical consumer.
edit: I jut looked for PCIe WWAN cards for desktops but nary a one came up on Google Shopping. There are, of course, plenty of mini cards which could be paired with an adapter card, but that is all I can find. That tells me that the need is uncommon for desktop machines and/or that USB WWAN cards are more than sufficient.
I'm just responding to your statement that mainframes are portable if Mac Pros are considered to be portable. There are thousands of Mac Pros that are used this way, but I doubt if there are many mainframes used this way.
I wasn't talking about WWAN cards, thought I'm sure that at some point they will turn up. You can get Express cards for PCI and PCI Express slots, so that shows that it's wrong to think that these machines aren't taken around, or can't be used for that purpose, as they can.
A typical Macbook & MBP user most likely benefits a lot more from having built-in cellular wireless than a typical Mac Pro user. For me, it was kind of an expedition to bring the thing in to the Apple store to get them to replace the old ATI card on warranty. I even dug up an old luggage dolly just because it's an awkward size.
A Mac Pro user that really does need cellular wireless, such as in the situation that you related, probably isn't going to be so put off by having a USB stick or even a PCIe to Express Card 34 adapter in the back.
It's thousands of Mac Pros that are taken on location rather than hundreds of thousands of portables. I'm not trying to get into a numbers game. It was just his comparison that brought it out.
I also mentioned the card adapters for wireless that are available. It really doesn't matter that the slot is in the back. You put it in and forget it.
It's thousands of Mac Pros that are taken on location rather than hundreds of thousands of portables. I'm not trying to get into a numbers game. It was just his comparison that brought it out.
I also mentioned the card adapters for wireless that are available. It really doesn't matter that the slot is in the back. You put it in and forget it.
I'm not trying to say that those aren't important users either, but from the context of the article and considerations for how likely a user of a given type of machine would need to have built-in 3G/4G type radio. As it is, Apple doesn't even include WiFi in the base configuration of the Mac Pro, even though it's standard on every other Mac.
Comments
I would wager that teethering will become available for the iPhone because AT&T does not wish to loose out on a single nickel of revenue. That option currently exists for my Blackberry on Verizon.
I currently use the Verizon USB Wireless dongle with very satisfactory results while out and about. It will be far better, in my opinion, to have an external device rather than an internal device for one major reason alluded to above: I can acquire a unit that works in Europe on a pay as you go plan and switch to the Verizon unit upon my return WITHOUT splitting the case. I can also upgrade as the technology evolves rather than having an obsolete computer after a minor tick upgrade in phone service.
I would wager that teethering will become available for the iPhone because AT&T does not wish to loose out on a single nickel of revenue. That option currently exists for my Blackberry on Verizon.
We have been over this a million times but I still find it hard to believe that US operators are still backward thinking and still charging for tethering. In Europe they simply see it as a data connection pure and simple.
It is considerably more data per second than DVD or CD, but it's much slower than any HDD, it uses a lot more power, it's noisier, any write errors trash a disc and each disc is expensive. Buying a HDD for backup is considerably more ideal for a consumer.
I didn't think his post was real since it doesn't make sense. LTE, which isn't even a finalized standard to be in an iPod Shuffle?
its only recently that HDDs have become cheap enough to be used as archive media, but even that has its problems long term.
I remember my first single speed CD burner at £500 and that was a bargain! now I doubt if you could get "just" a CD writer any more, but CD/DVD burners are for peanuts.
Subsidies suck! You always pay more in the end.
what if i drop my dsl accounts and get my internet from the 3 g option ??
i get a cheaper mac . and pay for something i was paying for any way . ?
Gee, they said the same thing about DVD when writers first came out.
There may be a difference this time though, I recall that CDs and DVDs had more capacity than a typical hard drive at that time it was introduced. That's not true with Blu-Ray. On the flip side, the drives were shockingly expensive, Blu-Ray drives went down in price very quickly.
As far as write errors go, they trash CDs and DVDs as well.
I can't say I've had a write error of note in a long time for any optical media. The one time that I remember is when I hit cancel in the middle of a burn.
After digging around, It seems that there are two Productized versions. The Gobi 1000 (PDF Warning) and Gobi 2000 (PDF Warning).
Both support HSPA on 850MHz and 1900MHz for the Americas and 2100MHz for the rest of the world, quad-band GSM, and 800/1900 MHz CDMA/EVDO for carriers like Verizon.
The 2000 supports HSPA on 800MHz and 900MHz for places unknown to me, while the 1000 doesn't.
Other differences include the SMS systems for CDMA networks, the GPS subsystem, upload speeds on HSPA networks, and Windows 7 support.
Both use the Mini PCI Express interface.
Now here's my uninformed conjecture:
This seems like a near drop-in solution for Apple. It allows users to pick their carrier, and includes GPS. The GPS could be helpful with the addition of CoreLocation in Snow Leopard.
Stumbling blocks could include...
Trying to fit a WiFi Module and a cellular module in the same laptop. If I'm not mistaken, the current generation of Apple laptops only has one mini PCI Express slot. Can someone confirm this?
Apple would have to work out how to get appropriate firmware images to customers. Each EVDO network would require it's own. HSPA networks might require their own firmware as well, unless Apple feels like tearing apart brand new Systems to install SIM cards for every customer. Maybe carriers would start handing out CDs with firmware images on them.
Maybe we'd see some Apple design magic here and find a single WiFi/Bluetooth/Gobi module with a SIM slot under the battery.
Mark this as plausible and move along.
Since ATT runs a wired network, what do you think it costs them to operate it versus their wireless network? ATT charges $20/month for 1.5mbps DSL in my area. If it is an additional $30 for the 3.6mbps 3G in my macbook there is definitely a case for purchasing a new laptop that has a subsidy and canceling my DSL and going wireless. Does anyone think that this would fly at ATT?
The wired networks are mostly paid for, even with their adding Fiber. That's one reason why they can offer services more cheaply. They, and other companies are spending far more upgrading their wireless networks.
AT&T and Verizon though, are spending big bucks on Fiber, either to the home in all cases with Verizon, or to the node in old areas, and to the home in new ones. But they charge a lot for those services. Those services do offer very high speeds though.
There may be a difference this time though, I recall that CDs and DVDs had more capacity than a typical hard drive at that time it was introduced. That's not true with Blu-Ray. On the flip side, the drives were shockingly expensive, Blu-Ray drives went down in price very quickly.
When CD writers first came out, the largest HDD was under 500 MB, while the CD offered 650 MB.
But the CD writer cost $6,000, and the disks were over $100 apiece for CD-R.
Not exactly a bargain. In todays dollars, far worse.
With DVD, the prices were about the same, but HDDs were much larger also.
It took years before either came down enough in cost to be useful, though still pretty expensive for even the top end consumer, and years more before they became affordable to the average user.
When I bought my Digital Audio model, the Pioneer 2x Writer was costing a bit over $1,000 as an OEM drive by itself, and disks cost $20. Apple dropped the price of the disks to $10, an outrageously low price at the time, meant to spur use.
Right now, you can buy BD writers for under $200, if you look around, and even the new 8x writers can be found for $350 or so. Disk prices have dropped to under $6 (per disk) for spindled 25 disk packages for 25 GB disks, and $11 (per disk) for a package of 50 GB versions, if, again, you look around.
Yes, HDDs are so much larger these days, that's true. But even 25 GB disks are far better for a SAFE storage of important material than are HDDs. And 25 GB is large enough for most HD video projects, which is something that can't be said about 8.5 GB DVDs.
I have friends who shoot fashion and other commercial goods. They generate 20 GB a day in files, sometimes more. They are mostly using BD now for offline storage.
I can't say I've had a write error of note in a long time for any optical media. The one time that I remember is when I hit cancel in the middle of a burn.
It's not common, but every once in a while, I do get one.
BD doesn't seem to have any more problems from what I'm told from the people who use them every day.
All true.
Yeah, it was pretty pompous. Besides, cellular data on a Mac Pro? How wasted does one have to be to think that one up?
Stop thinking to have a modem built into a Mac. Look at the Kindle. Has one from Sprint !
What if this "modem" would go into Apple's new iPad - the 4 times bigger than the iPhone touchscreen netbook everyone is looking forward to?
Just to make an even bigger point: Just a few minutes ago Amazon introduced a new 9.7" Kindle. Look at it - add color and touch (take off the keyboard ;-) and you have the "new iPad". Men - I sure hope Apple can repeat the magic [of the iPhone intro] at WWDC.
Stop thinking to have a modem built into a Mac. Look at the Kindle. Has one from Sprint !
What if this "modem" would go into Apple's new iPad - the 4 times bigger than the iPhone touchscreen netbook everyone is looking forward to?
The Mac Pro isn't remotely portable so having a mobile data connection would be very atypical. I'm sure their someone who doesn't have DSL, fiber or coax internet in their area but somehow have 3G internet where this would be more apropos, but their are USB card for this already. The Kindle is a portable device and has GPRS, pre-EDGE cellular data, that is even pretty slow for DLing text-only eBooks, despite being a nice touch to the Kindle.
The Mac Pro isn't remotely portable so having a mobile data connection would be very atypical. I'm sure their someone who doesn't have DSL, fiber or coax internet in their area but somehow have 3G internet where this would be more apropos, but their are USB card for this already. The Kindle is a portable device and has GPRS, pre-EDGE cellular data, that is even pretty slow for DLing text-only eBooks, despite being a nice touch to the Kindle.
I think "isn't remotely portable" is a bit over the top. The machine is very portable. There are other machines which are more effortlessly portable, being lighter and smaller. I work from my 17" MBP from several locations a day. I wouldn't consider it a mobile-on-the-go platform by any means, but I trade the performance, screen size and HD storage against needing maintain network connections all the time when away from my desk, the iPhone handles that.
I think "isn't remotely portable" is a bit over the top.
If you are being pedantic, then yes it can be moved, but so can a mainframe or a house for that matter. The Mac Pro is a desktop PC and a large one at that. It's not meant to disconnected from it's peripherals and carted around town. It has no battery so it can't be used without being plugged in. I'd say that for all intents and purposes it "isn't remotely portable".
If you are being pedantic, then yes it can be moved, but so can a mainframe or a house for that matter. The Mac Pro is a desktop PC and a large one at that. It's not meant to disconnected from it's peripherals and carted around town. It has no battery so it can't be used without being plugged in. I'd say that for all intents and purposes it "isn't remotely portable".
That depends. A lot of guys who shoot fashion will lug, not only a laptop, but also a desktop with them.
These shoots all depend on generators for power, and inverters from the van battery, so power isn't a problem, and neither is a way of moving the equipment.
Remember that lighting is often used during daylight hours for fill and other tasks. So are back-up drives, even RAIDS.
You might not think of bringing a big piece of equipment, but many pros do. That's only in a certain class of work, where money is being spent. I don't expect the "pro" living on a small budget, working for small amounts of money to be able to do this.
That depends. A lot of guys who shoot fashion will lug, not only a laptop, but also a desktop with them.
These shoots all depend on generators for power, and inverters from the van battery, so power isn't a problem, and neither is a way of moving the equipment.
Remember that lighting is often used during daylight hours for fill and other tasks. So are back-up drives, even RAIDS.
You might not think of bringing a big piece of equipment, but many pros do. That's only in a certain class of work, where money is being spent. I don't expect the "pro" living on a small budget, working for small amounts of money to be able to do this.
I'm sure it happens. Those rumoured Google data centers Cringely used to talk about, the ones built into shipping containers are portable too. But the conversation was about wireless cards built into the Mac Pro. While I know some people will need WWAN in the Mac Pros and other large desktops I don't see it as common enough that Apple would offer it as an option. Only for their portable machines, err, machines that are designed to be portable for the typical consumer.
edit: I jut looked for PCIe WWAN cards for desktops but nary a one came up on Google Shopping. There are, of course, plenty of mini cards which could be paired with an adapter card, but that is all I can find. That tells me that the need is uncommon for desktop machines and/or that USB WWAN cards are more than sufficient.
That depends. A lot of guys who shoot fashion will lug, not only a laptop, but also a desktop with them.
These shoots all depend on generators for power, and inverters from the van battery, so power isn't a problem, and neither is a way of moving the equipment.
Remember that lighting is often used during daylight hours for fill and other tasks. So are back-up drives, even RAIDS.
You might not think of bringing a big piece of equipment, but many pros do. That's only in a certain class of work, where money is being spent. I don't expect the "pro" living on a small budget, working for small amounts of money to be able to do this.
I think that's kind of an edge case though.
A typical Macbook & MBP user most likely benefits a lot more from having built-in cellular wireless than a typical Mac Pro user. For me, it was kind of an expedition to bring the thing in to the Apple store to get them to replace the old ATI card on warranty. I even dug up an old luggage dolly just because it's an awkward size.
A Mac Pro user that really does need cellular wireless, such as in the situation that you related, probably isn't going to be so put off by having a USB stick or even a PCIe to Express Card 34 adapter in the back.
I'm sure it happens. Those rumoured Google data centers Cringely used to talk about, the ones built into shipping containers are portable too. But the conversation was about wireless cards built into the Mac Pro. While I know some people will need WWAN in the Mac Pros and other large desktops I don't see it as common enough that Apple would offer it as an option. Only for their portable machines, err, machines that are designed to be portable for the typical consumer.
edit: I jut looked for PCIe WWAN cards for desktops but nary a one came up on Google Shopping. There are, of course, plenty of mini cards which could be paired with an adapter card, but that is all I can find. That tells me that the need is uncommon for desktop machines and/or that USB WWAN cards are more than sufficient.
I'm just responding to your statement that mainframes are portable if Mac Pros are considered to be portable. There are thousands of Mac Pros that are used this way, but I doubt if there are many mainframes used this way.
I wasn't talking about WWAN cards, thought I'm sure that at some point they will turn up. You can get Express cards for PCI and PCI Express slots, so that shows that it's wrong to think that these machines aren't taken around, or can't be used for that purpose, as they can.
I think that's kind of an edge case though.
A typical Macbook & MBP user most likely benefits a lot more from having built-in cellular wireless than a typical Mac Pro user. For me, it was kind of an expedition to bring the thing in to the Apple store to get them to replace the old ATI card on warranty. I even dug up an old luggage dolly just because it's an awkward size.
A Mac Pro user that really does need cellular wireless, such as in the situation that you related, probably isn't going to be so put off by having a USB stick or even a PCIe to Express Card 34 adapter in the back.
It's thousands of Mac Pros that are taken on location rather than hundreds of thousands of portables. I'm not trying to get into a numbers game. It was just his comparison that brought it out.
I also mentioned the card adapters for wireless that are available. It really doesn't matter that the slot is in the back. You put it in and forget it.
It's thousands of Mac Pros that are taken on location rather than hundreds of thousands of portables. I'm not trying to get into a numbers game. It was just his comparison that brought it out.
I also mentioned the card adapters for wireless that are available. It really doesn't matter that the slot is in the back. You put it in and forget it.
I'm not trying to say that those aren't important users either, but from the context of the article and considerations for how likely a user of a given type of machine would need to have built-in 3G/4G type radio. As it is, Apple doesn't even include WiFi in the base configuration of the Mac Pro, even though it's standard on every other Mac.