Apple files hint at re-engineered iMac and Mac Pro models, potentially without optical drives

1568101113

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 257
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post





    The 5.25" bay takes up a lot of space and adds to the internal cabling mess. External optical drives are the better option as Apple isn't adding costs to users who don't need them. I think people would be happier the Mac Pro drops in price by at least $100.


    The mac pro is actually one of the cleaner machines out there if you're looking at the inside. Aesthetics shouldn't be a big deal anyway on these things. Things that matter are that cables won't take unnecessary long term damage due to their placement and that they do not get in the way if replacing a drive or adding something else. Are you suggesting the need to route cables forces their hand on case design here, as in they need space to tuck them away?

  • Reply 142 of 257


    Originally Posted by hmm View Post

    Note some of the display dongles, the Apple Raid card, etc. Anytime it's not considered a mainstream item, they don't care. Check the reviews or read the comments on the Apple Store if you don't believe me.


     


    I decided to look up that one specifically for a link. It actually seems to be better reviewed than I remember, although that is a surprise. Peripherals like this are one of those awkward things that typically get ignored.


     


    http://store.apple.com/us/reviews/MD564ZM/A



     


    Do you have to prove ownership of the product to write a review? And Apple dealt with the problem the dual-link DVI to Mini DisplayPort adapter had. That made website headlines (we all remember that), and I've not heard boo about problems with the SuperDrive.

  • Reply 143 of 257


    Not cool for those of us who do use the optical drive for our profession. I understand the reason behind the change, but on an iMac, that’s troubling to hear. Having a CD burned for photo archives for our clients is extremely important to us and to our clients. It’s cheaper than spending money on flash drives. Having the “option” to by a CD burner is pure BS. You can say all you want to about cloud backup, but nothing is more secure to a client than a physical CD with their photos, etc. 

  • Reply 144 of 257
    tyler82tyler82 Posts: 876member


    A new Mac Mini with SSD hard drive to connect to my 27" LED Cinema Display looks like a perfect replacement for my 2008 Macbook unibody. The iPad has replaced the laptop for me in portability, but I will always want a Macintosh. 

  • Reply 145 of 257
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Originally Posted by Mr.Scott View Post

    Having the “option” to by a CD burner is pure BS.


     


    You wouldn't rather have a horizontal, tray-fed drive that can be faster than the vertical, slot-load one ever could be?

  • Reply 146 of 257
    rainrain Posts: 538member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post


    I was never paranoid about Apple, but this is about forcing people to use iTunes instead of listening/copying CDs or watching DVDs.



     


    As well as pushing companies to use their App Store.


    How long before you won't be able to obtain any software unless it comes from the App store ala iOS?

  • Reply 147 of 257
    stevehsteveh Posts: 480member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by iSheldon View Post





    Pffft- iMac needs a matte/ non glossy option way before a stupid tray option


    Third-party opportunity.

  • Reply 148 of 257
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,228moderator
    anonymouse wrote:
    Internal cabling mess? I haven't looked inside a Mac Pro for a few months, but as I recall, "Mac Pro" and "cabling mess" are contradictory terms.

    The cables behind the fan assembly:


    anonymouse wrote:
    I also don't think $100 matters a bit to someone buying a Mac Pro.

    It changes the form factor too though and could cut costs further than $100 if the chassis can be cut down.
    anonymouse wrote:
    The whole point of the iMac is not to have to have cables running all over the place.

    It's just one cable and it's only going to be used by a fraction of the users.

    I think the Mac Pro should be redesigned as a personal supercomputer again:

    - Single 6 or 8-core Ivy Bridge (Haswell if Intel does the right thing and skips IB)
    - Intel MIC, some variant of Knights Landing with 1-2 TFLOPs x86 double precision
    - high-end GPU (8970?) with unified memory so compute shares data with the other components, also 1-2 TFLOPs double precision
    - no PCI slots but instead 6x 20Gbps Thunderbolt ports
    - zero-config Thunderbolt chaining for parallel processing
    - smaller form factor due to removal of PCI and optical (at most 2/3 the current size)

    There would be a single model but possibly CPU options and it would be good if they worked with software developers like Adobe, Autodesk, Maxon, Pixar etc. to get the highest-end software optimized for the hardware. Apple can get Pixar to give them a scene from Toy Story 1 and render it on stage in real-time and then say that you now have the power of a render farm from 15 years ago inside a single tiny box. Then they demo the zero-config part and show the improvement. Then compare it to 'what you could have won' had they followed the linear path - a standard Dell/HP workstation and the new Mac Pro will blow it out the water.

    Give it one last shot in the arm for the next few years before it goes the way of ole yeller.
  • Reply 149 of 257
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

    I think the Mac Pro should be redesigned as a personal supercomputer again:

    - no PCI slots but instead 6x 20Gbps Thunderbolt ports

    - zero-config Thunderbolt chaining for parallel processing

    - smaller form factor due to removal of PCI and optical (at most 2/3 the current size)


     


    ????????????????????????


    But imagine how much whining there would be… image

  • Reply 150 of 257

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post



    There will be those who'll argue that 'optical drives' are obsolete etc., but to remove them from desktop systems (where there's very little concern for saving a few millimenters that they take up) would be a questionable move as I know many (especially college students) who still watch (RedBox) DVDs etc on their iMacs.

    We'll See if they decide to keep them or not...


    I have you blocked but went ahead and clicked.


     


    In short, my decision was sound.

  • Reply 151 of 257

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rain View Post


     


    As well as pushing companies to use their App Store.


    How long before you won't be able to obtain any software unless it comes from the App store ala iOS?



    You're right because there's absolutely no way to install software or view media on a Mac that did not originate from iTunes.


     


    On your second notion, I believe you have it backwards. I believe that GateKeeper will come to iOS, allowing you to download software from other sources.

  • Reply 152 of 257
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,300member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pt123 View Post


    That is fine for Apple to remove their optical drive, just as long as people don't whine about internet usage caps. It comes with the territory (downloads).



     


    I agree. Discs are still the cheapest way to load a lot of information into a computer. Note I said cheapest, not fastest.

  • Reply 153 of 257
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post





    The cables behind the fan assembly:



    It changes the form factor too though and could cut costs further than $100 if the chassis can be cut down.

    It's just one cable and it's only going to be used by a fraction of the users.

    I think the Mac Pro should be redesigned as a personal supercomputer again:

    - Single 6 or 8-core Ivy Bridge (Haswell if Intel does the right thing and skips IB)

    - Intel MIC, some variant of Knights Landing with 1-2 TFLOPs x86 double precision

    - high-end GPU (8970?) with unified memory so compute shares data with the other components, also 1-2 TFLOPs double precision

    - no PCI slots but instead 6x 20Gbps Thunderbolt ports

    - zero-config Thunderbolt chaining for parallel processing

    - smaller form factor due to removal of PCI and optical (at most 2/3 the current size)

    There would be a single model but possibly CPU options and it would be good if they worked with software developers like Adobe, Autodesk, Maxon, Pixar etc. to get the highest-end software optimized for the hardware. Apple can get Pixar to give them a scene from Toy Story 1 and render it on stage in real-time and then say that you now have the power of a render farm from 15 years ago inside a single tiny box. Then they demo the zero-config part and show the improvement. Then compare it to 'what you could have won' had they followed the linear path - a standard Dell/HP workstation and the new Mac Pro will blow it out the water.

    Give it one last shot in the arm for the next few years before it goes the way of ole yeller.


    Dell/HP use them as high margin units. Some of their consumer units are sold on terrible margins. The problem is that much of what you suggest would not likely play well together or fit good workstation setups. As for render farms, there are better ways to implement them at a high density level even for smaller shops. Larger shops would need all they can get given that feature animated films tend to go into millions of render hours. I'm guessing VFX would be more the market for the smaller solutions where they're kicking out a single scene. Ram becomes a huge factor for these things though. As to Thunderbolt, I can't see them fitting a 7970 in embedded form (8970 won't be out until later next year). It's quite large, and you would take up a lot of board area even if some of the cooling solutions it currently uses migrated off the card. This would also mean a custom card design for the mac pro, which I don't see happening. As for anything gained from removing an optical drive, Apple has been pushing up their per unit margins on the mac pro considerably. I imagine costs would be absorbed as they've slowly pushed it up and away from imac level pricing. Intel isn't skipping Ivy either. If anything it will push consumer haswell back. Right now Ivy is scheduled for early in the second half. If they went straight to haswell, there's no guarantee you'd see it prior to 2014 anyway.


     


    As I already typed below, I enjoy your imaginative responses. They're just not always likely. I read them because they're not boring. Most of the posts on here require little brain power to generate. On the other hand, you go on about what could be possible, yet you actually provide details to your theories which make them fun to read even if I doubt their plausibility.


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    ????????????????????????


    But imagine how much whining there would be… image





    That doesn't really make sense given that they can't be pooled anyway. It would break a lot of existing solutions without selling enough boxes. You'd have to somehow make up the cost to implement that many thunderbolt ports, which would likely mean a dual package board to get enough lanes after appropriate lanes are allocated to embedded graphics. Assuming intel is only certifying solutions which carry graphics, you wouldn't move all of that via one card anyway. This really becomes an outright clunky design, but I actually enjoy Marvin's wild imagination.

  • Reply 154 of 257

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post



    There will be those who'll argue that 'optical drives' are obsolete etc., but to remove them from desktop systems (where there's very little concern for saving a few millimenters that they take up) would be a questionable move as I know many (especially college students) who still watch (RedBox) DVDs etc on their iMacs.

    We'll See if they decide to keep them or not...


    I highly doubt they will remove it, especially with so many begging the opposite & that is to add a blu-ray drive.  It didn't make sense to keep the drive on the mini because most people aren't using it in a desktop application.  More often it is used as a server, a media station, or for digital signage.


     


    It's quite possible Apple may upgrade the external drive to blu-ray and go forward with a Mac Pro that is slimmer & axes the CD drive but I'd just be utterly shocked if they did.  It's their pro line, the people buying them want the expandability and don't care about how small & cute the thing is.  They want a workhorse with lots of options, trying to force them into a mold would be a dumb move (though they did already do it once with Final Cut).

  • Reply 155 of 257

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


     


    I agree. Discs are still the cheapest way to load a lot of information into a computer. Note I said cheapest, not fastest.



    There are companies now that manufacture throw away USB sticks that are pretty stinking cheap, I'd be interested to know how those compare in overall production cost vs traditional CD media.

  • Reply 156 of 257
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Originally Posted by hmm View Post

    That doesn't really make sense given that they can't be pooled anyway. It would break a lot of existing solutions without selling enough boxes. You'd have to somehow make up the cost to implement that many thunderbolt ports, which would likely mean a dual package board to get enough lanes after appropriate lanes are allocated to embedded graphics. Assuming intel is only certifying solutions which carry graphics, you wouldn't move all of that via one card anyway. This really becomes an outright clunky design, but I actually enjoy Marvin's wild imagination.


     


    Really? I love the idea of plug-and-speed computers. Don't have to get rid of your old one when you update, just set it on top of the new one and connect 'em both for an even faster machine.


     



    Originally Posted by hezetation View Post

    I highly doubt they will remove it, especially with so many begging the opposite & that is to add a blu-ray drive.


     


    No one is begging for a Blu-ray drive in an iMac or Mac Pro anymore. That died in aught eight, even. It's quite evident that Apple isn't going to be supporting Blu-ray playback ever, as well.

  • Reply 157 of 257
    rkevwillrkevwill Posts: 224member


    I know they lead in ditching things, which has turned out to be good, but I'm not ready to lose my optical drive on my desktop.

  • Reply 158 of 257


    They should’ve put “TV40” in the .plist, just to watch people go crazy.  image

  • Reply 159 of 257
    nhtnht Posts: 4,494member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Reading, it has for years, writing, Final Cut can make even player-watchable movies (and I think the OS does data discs), playback, nope. Not natively, at least.



     


    http://www.macblurayplayer.com

  • Reply 160 of 257
    nhtnht Posts: 4,494member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post



    I think the Mac Pro should be redesigned as a personal supercomputer again:

     


     


    The Mac Pro has never been a personal supercomputer so how would be one again?  It's been part of supercomputer clusters but it's no more a personal supercomputer than a PS3.


     


    The Mac Pro has always been a high end workstation.


     


     


    Quote:

    - Single 6 or 8-core Ivy Bridge (Haswell if Intel does the right thing and skips IB)

    - Intel MIC, some variant of Knights Landing with 1-2 TFLOPs x86 double precision

    - high-end GPU (8970?) with unified memory so compute shares data with the other components, also 1-2 TFLOPs double precision

     


     


     


     


    Fine although MICs may never go anywhere outside of...supercomputers/HPCs.  Which isn't the majority of Mac Pro installations.


     


    Quote:

    - no PCI slots but instead 6x 20Gbps Thunderbolt ports


     


     


    No.  I could elaborate but we've been through this ad nauseum.  If nothing else I may want a different GPU and there are high end cards that want an 8+ lane slot.


     


     


    Quote:

    - zero-config Thunderbolt chaining for parallel processing


     


    Nifty but could be done with mini servers too for an even smaller footprint.


     


     


    Quote:

    - smaller form factor due to removal of PCI and optical (at most 2/3 the current size)


     


    Which nobody really gives a shit about other than some desire for it to be rack mountable without using a hacksaw.


     


    Given your architecture allows for "zero-config chaining via thunderbolt" then chaining together Core i7 Ivy Bridge Mac Mini Servers with GPU + MIC will work just as well in a form factor the size of the original Mac Mini, cost less AND most importantly, not **** up the Mac Pro for users that actually need a workstation.


     


    You lose ECC ram but something like Dells reliable memory technology that can map bad bytes in DRAM might work well enough for a large percentage of use cases.


     


    http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/products/precn/en/Dell-Precision-workstation-Reliable-memory-technology-whitepaper.pdf

Sign In or Register to comment.