Needed: Macintosh desktop computer with multiple internal ssd hard drives in raid configuration, Thunderbolt out, high end video card, latest Intel chips. Will pay cash.
I'm not so demanding but a decent Mac desktop is required.
Needed: Macintosh desktop computer with an internal PCI-Express SSD RAID card, Thunderbolt out, high end video card, latest Intel chips. Will pay cash.
Fixed that for you?! ;^p
Seriously though, a PCI-Express SSD RAID card would be awesome for the OS & apps. It would also leave all the HDD bays open for a much larger internal RAID array, which would be controlled by its own PCI-Express RAID card. In a (hopefully still) 4 slot machine, I would still have room for a secondary (and lesser specced) graphics card to run 2 secondary monitors, while the 'double-wide' slot handles the high-end graphics card.
One more month.. Then I'm switching my studio to PC. Sad, but the cinebench scores on the new Boxx machines are nearly double the current mac offering.
There's a part of me that is looking forward to switching if it happens, as it would mean I could upgrade more frequently, as new advances are made. Where Apple has chosen to either upgrade very slowly or at this point, not at all.
Going to be switching laptops at the same time, haven't figured that one out yet, but I'm sure there's some good ones out there.
One more month.. Then I'm switching my studio to PC. Sad, but the cinebench scores on the new Boxx machines are nearly double the current mac offering.
There's a part of me that is looking forward to switching if it happens, as it would mean I could upgrade more frequently, as new advances are made. Where Apple has chosen to either upgrade very slowly or at this point, not at all.
Going to be switching laptops at the same time, haven't figured that one out yet, but I'm sure there's some good ones out there.
I think you will have to wait till June if it happens at all.
One more month.. Then I'm switching my studio to PC. Sad, but the cinebench scores on the new Boxx machines are nearly double the current mac offering.
This is pretty typical with Boxx. When things don't scale well with more cores, they overclock the machines. They're supposed to be quite good. Given that it's a smaller vendor, they're probably able to get earlier orders on cpus and things. They are obviously smaller than Apple. Their notebooks aren't manufactured here like many of their towers. I don't know if they've changed. The GoBoxx was rumored to previously be a rebranded Sager. If you're looking at Windows, Lenovo's notebooks look quite nice. One thing I should mention is that whether it's Apple or another brand, notebook displays are annoying as hell to calibrate. They've all switched to LED. LED is tough to calibrate with most colorimeters. I've considered switching myself at times as I deal with bootcamp part of the time anyway. Much of it is related to hardware options and driver performance. For me it wouldn't be until the next thing + Mountain Lion come out for a fair comparison. I should mention it has nothing to do with Apple's silence or refresh cycle.
Just to reiterate, my biggest issues are centered around gpu selection and drivers. Apple has always been a bit behind in that regard, but these things have become much more important to me. Personally I don't think a new mac pro will come out until mountain lion and I'm fine with that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony3d
I think you will have to wait till June if it happens at all.
One more month.. Then I'm switching my studio to PC. Sad, but the cinebench scores on the new Boxx machines are nearly double the current mac offering.
There's a part of me that is looking forward to switching if it happens, as it would mean I could upgrade more frequently, as new advances are made. Where Apple has chosen to either upgrade very slowly or at this point, not at all.
Going to be switching laptops at the same time, haven't figured that one out yet, but I'm sure there's some good ones out there.
Well. It's a free world.
Depends on what work you're doing. But you have to decide if the Mac platform/hardware is meeting your requirements.
Looking at the Mac Pro. It's the well rehearsed arguments. Apple could have upgraded it in numerous ways other than CPU to make it a compelling purchase along with a price cut. Especially for the entry model. In so many other ways than CPU it has languished.
9 years is a long time in computing. The current Pro looks like time has passed it by. In an era where Apple puts so much energy in an era of portability there's no reason why the Mac Pro's place in the scheme of things can't be re-factored into the paradigm shift.
I've considered switching myself at times as I deal with bootcamp part of the time anyway. Much of it is related to hardware options and driver performance. For me it wouldn't be until the next thing + Mountain Lion come out for a fair comparison. I should mention it has nothing to do with Apple's silence or refresh cycle.
Just to reiterate, my biggest issues are centered around gpu selection and drivers. Apple has always been a bit behind in that regard, but these things have become much more important to me. Personally I don't think a new mac pro will come out until mountain lion and I'm fine with that.
That's about it. I guess if he's waited this long then why not wait until the Summer is over and Mountain Lion is out. That's a decision for him, I guess. Mind you, I waited ten years for a decent Mac Pro with a decent GPU. I almost plumped for a dual core 3 gig Mac Pro...but waited a bit longer and got the iMac instead.
It's clear that everything will get a revamp this year with Mountain Lion. Laptops, obviously...and the desktops too.
I'd like a cheaper more compact pro with 6-8 core cpus and thunderbolt with a damn fine gpu.
If the Pro doesn't come by the time Mountain Lion launches then it will look ominous for the Pro.
Rhetoric? It's been that long since the Pro was dusted off that every argument about the Pro is rhetoric.
What was that? An entry model for a £1000?!!! The current entry Pro is twice that...wondered why sales sucked.
Lemon Bon Bon.
That's right, Mr. Bon Bon.
...and the top end...
2,999.00 USD = 1,873.18 GBP!
Apple could price the Pro like that today. And let desktop buyers decide on AIO beauty and power with the lovely screen...or a more powerful upgradable (allegedly) tower without the screen.
The chips alone cost more than that. (well, if I'm looking at the right chips? and yes, I know Apple gets a screaming deal on them beyond the price that we can see because they're a manufacturer)
The chips alone cost more than that. (well, if I'm looking at the right chips… and yes, I know Apple gets a screaming deal on them beyond the price that we can see because they're a manufacturer)
Screw those particular chips. Heh... The Ivy i7s offer more bang for buck. They can take the tower market mainstream again for their 'forgotten' creative pros.
They could go 4 core ivy for the lower and middle with 6 core xeon(?) at the high end with the old G3 prices and put in a juicy gpu in a compact case. You get a kickstart to tower sales.
Anything dual processor Xeon related £2000 and over using the existing case.
I miss the theatrics that went into the old keynotes. These days it's just:
- hey check out this new store we have
- look how many people visit the stores we have
- here's a new device that looks the same as the last one
- here's a new advert we made to explain why you should buy the new device and not the last one
When the performance mattered, they really put in the effort to show it. They could arguably do the same with the Mac Pro now.
Everyone else is going to sell high resource buyers on the incremental improvement over the last model and inevitably, Apple won't rival them on performance per dollar. All they have to do is demonstrate the appropriate use for the appropriate buyer.
Offer a stunning compact design at a better price with decent performance (within reason ) and show off the trump card: Thunderbolt. Nobody else is using it because they don't see the benefit. If Apple could allow you to hook up another machine as a co-processor with zero-config that appears transparently to the Mac OS, that's enough.
Just have a demo of the fastest E5 Xeon PC running a Cinebench render, then have a demo of a chain of 4x Mac Pros hooked up doing the same render. No matter how much of an incremental improvement the PC gets, Apple always has the integrated model to fall back on - the combination of software, interconnect options and selected hardware.
They can make the Mac Pro desirable again for one last run. Either that or put a Xeon in the iMac.
Marvin - So you would like a good portion of the next press conference to focus on tech specs? I can't say I blame you there. I would love to see that myself.
The question I would like to know though is do a majority of people sitting there care about the specs? Or do they think people will buy what they buy and make choices there.
These Sandy Bridge E chips came out a month ago or so? Apple probably had its plans set in place since it had to wait so long.
I miss the theatrics that went into the old keynotes. These days it's just:
- hey check out this new store we have
- look how many people visit the stores we have
- here's a new device that looks the same as the last one
- here's a new advert we made to explain why you should buy the new device and not the last one
When the performance mattered, they really put in the effort to show it. They could arguably do the same with the Mac Pro now.
Everyone else is going to sell high resource buyers on the incremental improvement over the last model and inevitably, Apple won't rival them on performance per dollar. All they have to do is demonstrate the appropriate use for the appropriate buyer.
Offer a stunning compact design at a better price with decent performance (within reason ) and show off the trump card: Thunderbolt. Nobody else is using it because they don't see the benefit. If Apple could allow you to hook up another machine as a co-processor with zero-config that appears transparently to the Mac OS, that's enough.
Just have a demo of the fastest E5 Xeon PC running a Cinebench render, then have a demo of a chain of 4x Mac Pros hooked up doing the same render. No matter how much of an incremental improvement the PC gets, Apple always has the integrated model to fall back on - the combination of software, interconnect options and selected hardware.
They can make the Mac Pro desirable again for one last run. Either that or put a Xeon in the iMac.
I miss the theatrics that went into the old keynotes. These days it's just:
- hey check out this new store we have
- look how many people visit the stores we have
- here's a new device that looks the same as the last one
- here's a new advert we made to explain why you should buy the new device and not the last one
When the performance mattered, they really put in the effort to show it. They could arguably do the same with the Mac Pro now.
Everyone else is going to sell high resource buyers on the incremental improvement over the last model and inevitably, Apple won't rival them on performance per dollar. All they have to do is demonstrate the appropriate use for the appropriate buyer.
Offer a stunning compact design at a better price with decent performance (within reason ) and show off the trump card: Thunderbolt. Nobody else is using it because they don't see the benefit. If Apple could allow you to hook up another machine as a co-processor with zero-config that appears transparently to the Mac OS, that's enough.
Just have a demo of the fastest E5 Xeon PC running a Cinebench render, then have a demo of a chain of 4x Mac Pros hooked up doing the same render. No matter how much of an incremental improvement the PC gets, Apple always has the integrated model to fall back on - the combination of software, interconnect options and selected hardware.
They can make the Mac Pro desirable again for one last run. Either that or put a Xeon in the iMac.
Hey, Marv', where ya been?
I think you have a point with the keynotes when Apple was in 'survival mode.'
I understand that we've had a few home runs with iPod, iPhone and iPad. The iMac had a decent redesign and the Air has been tweaked. Pretty amazing stuff.
But the Pro really stands out as the machine that was once the jewel in the crown, the flagship and it would be nice for it to have an emphatic redesign that puts it back on the map.
I love your idea of a compact pro with thunderbolt and daisy chaining another box for 'co-processor' mode!
Apple have the OS. They have the means. If anyone could make this X-Grid work, it would be them. They have Open CL. Do they have the will?
Imagine you have a 4 core ivy bridge with a decent dedicated GPU. £999. You buy a 2nd box and you have a 'dual processor' Mac Pro. You drive a bit more volume and still get the £2000 price. It created a compelling render farm prospect for Mac heads. When it's time to upgrade? Just add another box instead of getting rid of the other one. You end up with 8 cores instead of 4 instead of being ass-reamed over one box.
I think that would put the Pro tower compact back on the map.
£999 per box. You get 4 cores. That's pretty decent. Lose the screen but you get better GPU as compensation.
If you pay £4k you get 16 cores. But you build as you need. 1 a year? After 4 years, your Mac 'workstation' grows with you over time. Maybe in a nice stackable design. Lego bricks.
Marvin - So you would like a good portion of the next press conference to focus on tech specs? I can't say I blame you there. I would love to see that myself.
The question I would like to know though is do a majority of people sitting there care about the specs? Or do they think people will buy what they buy and make choices there.
These Sandy Bridge E chips came out a month ago or so? Apple probably had its plans set in place since it had to wait so long.
I just don't believe desktops are dead quite yet.
In fairness, Apple's decision on the future of the Mac Pro has already been decided in reality.
People do care about price and specs. When Apple did it right with the iPad...people ooh and ahhh at the amazing £399 price when most surmised Apple would charge £1000!
And the link to the original G3 tower which had an amazing price! Hard to believe in those days the G3 tower occupied the iMac price range and the imac pretty much the £500-£1200 range.
I'd like to see Apple drive the Pro back into the mainstream again...
I think it's a case of the iPad stealing the limelight for now and then the Mac Tsunami will begin...
Marvin - So you would like a good portion of the next press conference to focus on tech specs? I can't say I blame you there. I would love to see that myself.
The question I would like to know though is do a majority of people sitting there care about the specs? Or do they think people will buy what they buy and make choices there.
I don't think they should necessarily focus on technical specs but usage scenarios. In the past, it just happened to be the case that both coincided because everyone struggled for better performance. Steve Jobs always knew best how to describe these things and it's about areas of emphasis. Products are built and designed for their target audience.
I think the iPhone is the device that should always be with you as your personal assistant and communication device.
The iPad will eventually replace the laptop. I don't think the laptop design is right but for now, it is necessary for performance and flexibility.
The Mini is a desktop that is cheap and very small - ideal entry model desktop, easy to upgrade and fits lots of usage scenarios.
The iMac is simple, one plug and you are away and good value when you take into consideration the displays.
The Mac Pro is for high resource users but the current design is for high resource users of a past era that is long gone. Optical storage is dead, almost no-one is buying PCI cards and the prices are way too high.
These users have demonstrated time and time again that no upgrade is good enough. They will pay whatever their budget allows to achieve the performance they need so the design should accommodate that.
WWDC is an event for developers so software should be the subject of the event but these users need good hardware too and a scalable hardware model would go down well. I think the main focus should be resolution independence and the further convergence of iOS and Mac OS and the hardware can be the surprise 'oh and one other thing'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon
I love your idea of a compact pro with thunderbolt and daisy chaining another box for 'co-processor' mode!
Apple have the OS. They have the means. If anyone could make this X-Grid work, it would be them. They have Open CL. Do they have the will?
Imagine you have a 4 core ivy bridge with a decent dedicated GPU. £999.
When it comes to emphasising the performance, I'd like to see the Mac Pro move exclusively to higher-end chips. Intel keeps building Xeons as they are the best chips they can offer and Apple keeps building Mac Pros around them as that's how they can build the best workstations. The problem they have is that with an old design, they don't offer the best chips for the money you pay.
I think a realistic expectation is to have a 6-core Xeon compact Mac Pro for £2,000. High margins for the low volume but good value for the target audience and scalable. Buy 3 of them and you have an 18-core/36-thread render farm for £6,000 that is easy to upgrade at any point in time, regardless of what Intel releases and easy resale for old machines.
Comments
Yes. It's by turns frustrating and sad.
Needed: Macintosh desktop computer with multiple internal ssd hard drives in raid configuration, Thunderbolt out, high end video card, latest Intel chips. Will pay cash.
I'm not so demanding but a decent Mac desktop is required.
Yes. It's by turns frustrating and sad.
Needed: Macintosh desktop computer with an internal PCI-Express SSD RAID card, Thunderbolt out, high end video card, latest Intel chips. Will pay cash.
Fixed that for you?! ;^p
Seriously though, a PCI-Express SSD RAID card would be awesome for the OS & apps. It would also leave all the HDD bays open for a much larger internal RAID array, which would be controlled by its own PCI-Express RAID card. In a (hopefully still) 4 slot machine, I would still have room for a secondary (and lesser specced) graphics card to run 2 secondary monitors, while the 'double-wide' slot handles the high-end graphics card.
There's a part of me that is looking forward to switching if it happens, as it would mean I could upgrade more frequently, as new advances are made. Where Apple has chosen to either upgrade very slowly or at this point, not at all.
Going to be switching laptops at the same time, haven't figured that one out yet, but I'm sure there's some good ones out there.
One more month.. Then I'm switching my studio to PC. Sad, but the cinebench scores on the new Boxx machines are nearly double the current mac offering.
There's a part of me that is looking forward to switching if it happens, as it would mean I could upgrade more frequently, as new advances are made. Where Apple has chosen to either upgrade very slowly or at this point, not at all.
Going to be switching laptops at the same time, haven't figured that one out yet, but I'm sure there's some good ones out there.
I think you will have to wait till June if it happens at all.
One more month.. Then I'm switching my studio to PC. Sad, but the cinebench scores on the new Boxx machines are nearly double the current mac offering.
This is pretty typical with Boxx. When things don't scale well with more cores, they overclock the machines. They're supposed to be quite good. Given that it's a smaller vendor, they're probably able to get earlier orders on cpus and things. They are obviously smaller than Apple. Their notebooks aren't manufactured here like many of their towers. I don't know if they've changed. The GoBoxx was rumored to previously be a rebranded Sager. If you're looking at Windows, Lenovo's notebooks look quite nice. One thing I should mention is that whether it's Apple or another brand, notebook displays are annoying as hell to calibrate. They've all switched to LED. LED is tough to calibrate with most colorimeters. I've considered switching myself at times as I deal with bootcamp part of the time anyway. Much of it is related to hardware options and driver performance. For me it wouldn't be until the next thing + Mountain Lion come out for a fair comparison. I should mention it has nothing to do with Apple's silence or refresh cycle.
Just to reiterate, my biggest issues are centered around gpu selection and drivers. Apple has always been a bit behind in that regard, but these things have become much more important to me. Personally I don't think a new mac pro will come out until mountain lion and I'm fine with that.
I think you will have to wait till June if it happens at all.
You post way too much rhetoric.
One more month.. Then I'm switching my studio to PC. Sad, but the cinebench scores on the new Boxx machines are nearly double the current mac offering.
There's a part of me that is looking forward to switching if it happens, as it would mean I could upgrade more frequently, as new advances are made. Where Apple has chosen to either upgrade very slowly or at this point, not at all.
Going to be switching laptops at the same time, haven't figured that one out yet, but I'm sure there's some good ones out there.
Well. It's a free world.
Depends on what work you're doing. But you have to decide if the Mac platform/hardware is meeting your requirements.
Looking at the Mac Pro. It's the well rehearsed arguments. Apple could have upgraded it in numerous ways other than CPU to make it a compelling purchase along with a price cut. Especially for the entry model. In so many other ways than CPU it has languished.
9 years is a long time in computing. The current Pro looks like time has passed it by. In an era where Apple puts so much energy in an era of portability there's no reason why the Mac Pro's place in the scheme of things can't be re-factored into the paradigm shift.
Lemon Bon Bon.
I've considered switching myself at times as I deal with bootcamp part of the time anyway. Much of it is related to hardware options and driver performance. For me it wouldn't be until the next thing + Mountain Lion come out for a fair comparison. I should mention it has nothing to do with Apple's silence or refresh cycle.
Just to reiterate, my biggest issues are centered around gpu selection and drivers. Apple has always been a bit behind in that regard, but these things have become much more important to me. Personally I don't think a new mac pro will come out until mountain lion and I'm fine with that.
That's about it. I guess if he's waited this long then why not wait until the Summer is over and Mountain Lion is out. That's a decision for him, I guess. Mind you, I waited ten years for a decent Mac Pro with a decent GPU. I almost plumped for a dual core 3 gig Mac Pro...but waited a bit longer and got the iMac instead.
It's clear that everything will get a revamp this year with Mountain Lion. Laptops, obviously...and the desktops too.
I'd like a cheaper more compact pro with 6-8 core cpus and thunderbolt with a damn fine gpu.
If the Pro doesn't come by the time Mountain Lion launches then it will look ominous for the Pro.
Rhetoric? It's been that long since the Pro was dusted off that every argument about the Pro is rhetoric.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Fixed that for you?!
Yes. I am down with that, for sure.
1,599.00 USD = 998.74 GBP
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwBY2...c0RVAAAAAAAABw
Those were the days.
What was that? An entry model for a £1000?!!! The current entry Pro is twice that...wondered why sales sucked.
Lemon Bon Bon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwBY2...c0RVAAAAAAAABw
Those were the days.
What was that? An entry model for a £1000?!!! The current entry Pro is twice that...wondered why sales sucked.
Lemon Bon Bon.
That's right, Mr. Bon Bon.
...and the top end...
2,999.00 USD = 1,873.18 GBP!
Apple could price the Pro like that today. And let desktop buyers decide on AIO beauty and power with the lovely screen...or a more powerful upgradable (allegedly) tower without the screen.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Apple could price the Pro like that today.
The chips alone cost more than that. (well, if I'm looking at the right chips? and yes, I know Apple gets a screaming deal on them beyond the price that we can see because they're a manufacturer)
The chips alone cost more than that. (well, if I'm looking at the right chips… and yes, I know Apple gets a screaming deal on them beyond the price that we can see because they're a manufacturer)
Screw those particular chips.
They could go 4 core ivy for the lower and middle with 6 core xeon(?) at the high end with the old G3 prices and put in a juicy gpu in a compact case. You get a kickstart to tower sales.
Anything dual processor Xeon related £2000 and over using the existing case.
Lemon Bon Bon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwBY2...c0RVAAAAAAAABw
Those were the days.
I miss the theatrics that went into the old keynotes. These days it's just:
- hey check out this new store we have
- look how many people visit the stores we have
- here's a new device that looks the same as the last one
- here's a new advert we made to explain why you should buy the new device and not the last one
When the performance mattered, they really put in the effort to show it. They could arguably do the same with the Mac Pro now.
Everyone else is going to sell high resource buyers on the incremental improvement over the last model and inevitably, Apple won't rival them on performance per dollar. All they have to do is demonstrate the appropriate use for the appropriate buyer.
Offer a stunning compact design at a better price with decent performance (within reason
Just have a demo of the fastest E5 Xeon PC running a Cinebench render, then have a demo of a chain of 4x Mac Pros hooked up doing the same render. No matter how much of an incremental improvement the PC gets, Apple always has the integrated model to fall back on - the combination of software, interconnect options and selected hardware.
They can make the Mac Pro desirable again for one last run. Either that or put a Xeon in the iMac.
The question I would like to know though is do a majority of people sitting there care about the specs? Or do they think people will buy what they buy and make choices there.
These Sandy Bridge E chips came out a month ago or so? Apple probably had its plans set in place since it had to wait so long.
I just don't believe desktops are dead quite yet.
I miss the theatrics that went into the old keynotes. These days it's just:
- hey check out this new store we have
- look how many people visit the stores we have
- here's a new device that looks the same as the last one
- here's a new advert we made to explain why you should buy the new device and not the last one
When the performance mattered, they really put in the effort to show it. They could arguably do the same with the Mac Pro now.
Everyone else is going to sell high resource buyers on the incremental improvement over the last model and inevitably, Apple won't rival them on performance per dollar. All they have to do is demonstrate the appropriate use for the appropriate buyer.
Offer a stunning compact design at a better price with decent performance (within reason
Just have a demo of the fastest E5 Xeon PC running a Cinebench render, then have a demo of a chain of 4x Mac Pros hooked up doing the same render. No matter how much of an incremental improvement the PC gets, Apple always has the integrated model to fall back on - the combination of software, interconnect options and selected hardware.
They can make the Mac Pro desirable again for one last run. Either that or put a Xeon in the iMac.
Great post.
I miss the theatrics that went into the old keynotes. These days it's just:
- hey check out this new store we have
- look how many people visit the stores we have
- here's a new device that looks the same as the last one
- here's a new advert we made to explain why you should buy the new device and not the last one
When the performance mattered, they really put in the effort to show it. They could arguably do the same with the Mac Pro now.
Everyone else is going to sell high resource buyers on the incremental improvement over the last model and inevitably, Apple won't rival them on performance per dollar. All they have to do is demonstrate the appropriate use for the appropriate buyer.
Offer a stunning compact design at a better price with decent performance (within reason
Just have a demo of the fastest E5 Xeon PC running a Cinebench render, then have a demo of a chain of 4x Mac Pros hooked up doing the same render. No matter how much of an incremental improvement the PC gets, Apple always has the integrated model to fall back on - the combination of software, interconnect options and selected hardware.
They can make the Mac Pro desirable again for one last run. Either that or put a Xeon in the iMac.
Hey, Marv', where ya been?
I think you have a point with the keynotes when Apple was in 'survival mode.'
I understand that we've had a few home runs with iPod, iPhone and iPad. The iMac had a decent redesign and the Air has been tweaked. Pretty amazing stuff.
But the Pro really stands out as the machine that was once the jewel in the crown, the flagship and it would be nice for it to have an emphatic redesign that puts it back on the map.
I love your idea of a compact pro with thunderbolt and daisy chaining another box for 'co-processor' mode!
Apple have the OS. They have the means. If anyone could make this X-Grid work, it would be them. They have Open CL. Do they have the will?
Imagine you have a 4 core ivy bridge with a decent dedicated GPU. £999. You buy a 2nd box and you have a 'dual processor' Mac Pro. You drive a bit more volume and still get the £2000 price. It created a compelling render farm prospect for Mac heads. When it's time to upgrade? Just add another box instead of getting rid of the other one. You end up with 8 cores instead of 4 instead of being ass-reamed over one box.
I think that would put the Pro tower compact back on the map.
Drool. Imagine 4 compact pros daisy chained. Der-rool.
(I wouldn't be adverse to a 6 core xeon being put in the top end iMac either...)
Lemon Bon Bon .
If you pay £4k you get 16 cores. But you build as you need. 1 a year? After 4 years, your Mac 'workstation' grows with you over time. Maybe in a nice stackable design. Lego bricks.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Great post.
I'd second that. It was a great post.
It completely nails the thread hands down.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Marvin - So you would like a good portion of the next press conference to focus on tech specs? I can't say I blame you there. I would love to see that myself.
The question I would like to know though is do a majority of people sitting there care about the specs? Or do they think people will buy what they buy and make choices there.
These Sandy Bridge E chips came out a month ago or so? Apple probably had its plans set in place since it had to wait so long.
I just don't believe desktops are dead quite yet.
In fairness, Apple's decision on the future of the Mac Pro has already been decided in reality.
People do care about price and specs. When Apple did it right with the iPad...people ooh and ahhh at the amazing £399 price when most surmised Apple would charge £1000!
And the link to the original G3 tower which had an amazing price! Hard to believe in those days the G3 tower occupied the iMac price range and the imac pretty much the £500-£1200 range.
I'd like to see Apple drive the Pro back into the mainstream again...
I think it's a case of the iPad stealing the limelight for now and then the Mac Tsunami will begin...
Lemon Bon Bon.
Marvin - So you would like a good portion of the next press conference to focus on tech specs? I can't say I blame you there. I would love to see that myself.
The question I would like to know though is do a majority of people sitting there care about the specs? Or do they think people will buy what they buy and make choices there.
I don't think they should necessarily focus on technical specs but usage scenarios. In the past, it just happened to be the case that both coincided because everyone struggled for better performance. Steve Jobs always knew best how to describe these things and it's about areas of emphasis. Products are built and designed for their target audience.
I think the iPhone is the device that should always be with you as your personal assistant and communication device.
The iPad will eventually replace the laptop. I don't think the laptop design is right but for now, it is necessary for performance and flexibility.
The Mini is a desktop that is cheap and very small - ideal entry model desktop, easy to upgrade and fits lots of usage scenarios.
The iMac is simple, one plug and you are away and good value when you take into consideration the displays.
The Mac Pro is for high resource users but the current design is for high resource users of a past era that is long gone. Optical storage is dead, almost no-one is buying PCI cards and the prices are way too high.
These users have demonstrated time and time again that no upgrade is good enough. They will pay whatever their budget allows to achieve the performance they need so the design should accommodate that.
WWDC is an event for developers so software should be the subject of the event but these users need good hardware too and a scalable hardware model would go down well. I think the main focus should be resolution independence and the further convergence of iOS and Mac OS and the hardware can be the surprise 'oh and one other thing'.
I love your idea of a compact pro with thunderbolt and daisy chaining another box for 'co-processor' mode!
Apple have the OS. They have the means. If anyone could make this X-Grid work, it would be them. They have Open CL. Do they have the will?
Imagine you have a 4 core ivy bridge with a decent dedicated GPU. £999.
When it comes to emphasising the performance, I'd like to see the Mac Pro move exclusively to higher-end chips. Intel keeps building Xeons as they are the best chips they can offer and Apple keeps building Mac Pros around them as that's how they can build the best workstations. The problem they have is that with an old design, they don't offer the best chips for the money you pay.
I think a realistic expectation is to have a 6-core Xeon compact Mac Pro for £2,000. High margins for the low volume but good value for the target audience and scalable. Buy 3 of them and you have an 18-core/36-thread render farm for £6,000 that is easy to upgrade at any point in time, regardless of what Intel releases and easy resale for old machines.