Think about what they could have done with this in the existing case: Dual 12 core processors. Up to 128GB RAM. 2 solid state drives AND 4 hard drives. And two Blu-Ray drives. And 4 PCI Express slots.
Yes, why just one processor, the 12 core model will cost a fortune.
And a new motherboard in with the actual design could give you easily 256GB ram
My organization is a "Pro" user. The data we collect and reduce is measured in tens of terabytes per week.
We do highway data collection for DOTs, in an effort that is sometimes referred to as Geospatial Mobile Mapping. Our dual LiDAR, 3X8meg camera systems previously needed an 8 Core Xserve to operate successfully. We now do the same thing with a loaded solid state Mac Mini using a Thunderbolt expansion box and a 4 bay USB3 removable hard drive bay. We needed to change our approach as there wasn't a perfect solution available to us after the loss of the Xserve. The Mac Pro was a good engine but access to the storage bays was cumbersome at best and there wasn't USB3 or Thunderbolt. All of our data comes out of the vehicles as raw removable hard drives and is then loaded onto Promise raids at the office. It is distributed through an array of Xserves to over 80 27 inch iMacs for data reduction (analysis and extraction of asset information). We also have a sensor package that does automated 3D pavement analysis but that system forces us to move to the Mac Pro for the pure horsepower and throughput needed to resolve the final solution.
Our process was forced to evolve as we searched for the best technological solution. Since our whole methodology (software and hardware) is so tightly coupled to Apple and the Mac OS, I was very concerned about what was going to come in the next generation of the Mac Pro package. Funny thing. I think they nailed it. Now there is an inexpensive base system in the Mac Mini and a nice high end engine in the new Mac Pro. All of our storage is external and removable and we have a functional methodology for handling it on both machines. In fact, now, all of our peripheral components will be interchangeable between both boxes giving us a nice power curve choice.
Although our workflow model is more dense than the one that many video and film professionals use, it would easily scale to those environments. Consider the new Mac Pro as a high end computing engine. Storage can be local on an external box or on a raid in a server room for multiple workstation collaboration. It is much easier for us to manage the "Big Data" off of the servers. The one place that I am not to sure about implementing the new Mac Pro is as a file server in the rack of the server room to replace our current Xserves. That solution is yet to be explored as we learn more about this hot new package from our favorite fruit company.
This image shows the two GPU boards; on the right hand one we see the SDD blade; on the left hand one we can see the pads where a second SSD blade could be added in…
And for those lamenting the fact that the new Mac Pro is now a single CPU machine; ask yourself why did Apple go to dual CPUs in the first place? Maybe something to do with the fact that CPUs were single core items in the past, so running dual CPUs was the only way to get multiple cores in the box…
Now we all can just only wait and see what new info comes out the closer Apple gets to actually releasing this new sexy beast…!
I am going to go out on a limb and suggest professionals looking for a workstation don't have "marvel of packaging" high on their list of wanted features. The design of this machine was not done to meet the needs of professionals. It was done for Apple's need to minimize upgradeability to keep people buying new machines every few years.
Don't get me wrong, I think the design is cool and I think they will probably sell a lot of them. Lets face it, there are a lot of professional Apple users that will buy whatever Apple throws at them and learn to deal with any limitations it may have. From a business standpoint, I think it is an amazing design. But from a professional user standpoint, it is horrible.
I am rather curious how long Apple can keep this kind of thing going and how long Apple users will keep accepting it? Maybe indefinitely I suppose. Time will tell.
-kpluck
So sit one inside an old Mac Pro case and stuff the rest of the empty space with thunderbolt 2 stuff.
I hope some of the supposed experts replying here, understand the expandability of thunderbolt ports. Including, external PCI enclosures, with any PCI device you want to throw in there.
For musicians, sound recordists and film makers it is often crucial to have everything in one box. Just imagine you go onto a location and first of all you have to wire up all the external gear, drives, video cards (red-rocket, black-magic, avid, ...), audio interfaces (pro-tools, ...), etc., half of it coming with an external power supply. That is a great hassle and a constant source of potential problems. How often do you see a Mac Pro standing in a dark corner of a stage or in the back of a production van working away. That won't be possible with the Mac Pro X or whatever it is called. Just something Apple could consider.
There are zero Firewire 800 ports, not two as stated in the article.
There are two Ethernet ports; the article is vague on this.
The article's vague because its author thinks Ethernet is FireWire 800.
Originally Posted by DarkVader
That has to be the worst possible design for a pro machine that I could imagine.
This proves that Apple has done 100% the right thing.
Pros don't want cutesy cylinders, they want EXPANSION.
GUESS WHAT THE CYLINDER CAN DO, KIDDO.
Pros still need optical drives.
That's so effing stupid.
Pros want multiple processors.
Pros want a lot of cores. Multiple processors are just a means to that end. You'd know that if you actually knew anything.
Also? There are no single-chip processors with 12 cores from any manufacturer. Not that I can find, anyway. Not Sandy, Ivy, or Haswell.
Think about what they could have done with this in the existing case:
Yeah, they could have made it a worthless update that didn't actually innovate anything and for which they would have been mocked and derided because it was "late".
Instead they punched people like you in the metaphorical face and told you to shut up. This is the future. Deal with it.
Not x86 based, but Tilera has some monster multicore chips. Their TILEPro chips have 36 or 64 cores. They run hot as a sonofabitch of course.
And for those lamenting the fact that the new Mac Pro is now a single CPU machine; ask yourself why did Apple go to dual CPUs in the first place? Maybe something to do with the fact that CPUs were single core items in the past, so running dual CPUs was the only way to get multiple cores in the box…
No, the first Mac Pro (2006) came with a 2 x 2-core and 2 x 4-core options. Apple is just compromising in this respect.
I think everyone in here understands that (or they do now).
But I guess the bigger question that I was raising was simply, "what's the point?"
I have never heard a professional say the Mac Pro was too large. What is great about a small cylinder shape that it outweights the annoyance of having a gazillion external drives and cables?
Maybe if this thing was a true revolution in performance I might be more inclined to say, "yeah, it's worth it." But it's going to use standard, off the shelf Haswell processors that can be found on any other workstation computer. It was like the designers said "hehe, yeah, a small cylinder looks really cool!!" And then when someone from engineering said, "but most professional users don't really care about the shape of the machine," the designers just said, "well let them add external drives!!!"
Again, it's probably going to be a great machine. It's much easier to see the utility when Apple reduces the size of Macbooks, ipads, etc. I just don't see what the huge advantage is of making this thing so tiny that it lacks built-in features that many pros need and rely on.
Bingo.
The last thing us "retarded pros" want is more cables around the desk.
The only thing I didn't like with the 'cheese grater' towers is the dust issue. I'm looking at this design and thinking it's not going to work out too well being on the floor with dust/hair/particles/coffee and all other elements that are affected by gravity - meaning this thing is meant to be on the desk... with a mess of cables and external devices strewn all over the place.
A big box with everything tucked away nicely inside it... locked up... does have its merits.
And what if thunderbolt isn't supported by the industry and there is no plethora of devices?
I'm very strongly recommending a 'Wait for rev2' on this tower.
The last thing us "retarded pros" want is more cables around the desk.
The only thing I didn't like with the 'cheese grater' towers is the dust issue. I'm looking at this design and thinking it's not going to work out too well being on the floor with dust/hair/particles/coffee and all other elements that are affected by gravity - meaning this thing is meant to be on the desk... with a mess of cables and external devices strewn all over the place.
A big box with everything tucked away nicely inside it... locked up... does have its merits.
And what if thunderbolt isn't supported by the industry and there is no plethora of devices?
I'm very strongly recommending a 'Wait for rev2' on this tower.
Well, there are the following products already on the market.
Several mfg of external drives and drive arrays. G Tech, Drobo, Promise, LaCie, ATTO, Buffalo Tech, Elgato, Seagate, and others
Belkin, Matrox Thunderbolt docking station
Sonnet, OWC Mercury, Magma PCI expansion chassis
Thunderbolt monitor (duh)
Universal Audio Apollo 16
Blackmagic Cinema Camera
There are also adapter cables to transform Thunderbolt into another type of I/O with a simple adapter cable.
Obviously, there will be more devices, but as always, a new i/O takes time for it to gain traction. But I think it's best suited for the DAW and Video production crowds mainly.
And for those lamenting the fact that the new Mac Pro is now a single CPU machine; ask yourself why did Apple go to dual CPUs in the first place? Maybe something to do with the fact that CPUs were single core items in the past, so running dual CPUs was the only way to get multiple cores in the box…
Quote:
Originally Posted by glnf
No, the first Mac Pro (2006) came with a 2 x 2-core and 2 x 4-core options. Apple is just compromising in this respect.
I was actually think further back, to the days of Motorola and the PowerPC CPUs…
If I had one wish it would be to have the power cord socket on the back - and 1/2 of all the connector sockets (Thunderbolt 2 and USB 3) on the front. I don't look forward to spinning this around with all the cables attached at the back.
I feel very strange. Very strange. I've been bashing iToys for years. I bashed the new iMac as well. And the new Mac Mini too...
...but...
Today... I can only say I love this new machine...
Apple, congratulations, this is the desktop I wanted, and I believe it's exactly the desktop the performance-demanding market wants. Now don't miss it with a wrong price, please. Either surprise us with an unbeatable price, or make it scalable so that there's an entry model not far away from the older Mac Pro prices.
I've wanted a Linux Creative Suite for years. According to threads on Adobe's forum it will never happen, as their research suggests lack of suitable demand. My desire to run Linux is really just a desire for powerful hardware and a lean OS. As for 4K, it can be offered on Displayport 1.2. That has been out since 2010. Desktop display hardware tends to move slowly compared to smaller formats.
16GB dimms may become cheap enough to be tolerable. That would at least get you to 64GB. They can't go sodimm to save space with ECC memory. I'm not sure whether it's a proprietary SSD format.
I almost want to steal that line for a sig. It's great. I'm going to remain undecided until the machine is out for some time, and I know the exact cost of configuration and accompanying performance.
The reason we will never see a Linux version of anything is because Linux is a constantly moving target with hundreds of fragmentations. We see this "nothing new to see here" with Android fragmentation. If Adobe builds a Windows version of CS Suite, they know it will work on all current versions that Microsoft still offers support for. Likewise on Mac OS X. Linux there is no such thing. Most people don't have the patience to fiddle on Linux to make things work. This is why the entirety of Linux that people are using are in embedded devices and servers controlled with web browsers. Linux is and always will be a unsupported platform for the desktop. You can lay the blame for that at the GPL Licence shenanigans.
As for the Mac Pro, the way I see it is that the 3 boards seen in the illustrations , one is the CPU board (the one with the RAM) and the other two boards are the video cards. These boards can likely be replaced, and are probably all placed initially in BYO configurations. So what Apple showed today was likely the top or middle configuration.
Also I believe that SSD socket is a just a PCIe socket. It's not a SATA port. It's likely designed in a way to allow replacement of the SSD when it wears out.
Like what I expect is Apple will release something like this BYO:
22nm IVY Bridge E5-1600 v2 or E5-2600 v2 with 6 cores as stock (4 or 8 and 12 core optional)
32GB 1866Mhz ECC DDR3L ram (upgradeable to 64GB)
AMD FirePro W9000 x 2 (6GB ea) (configurable as single board, or dual board)
SSD configuration of 128GB, 256GB, 512GB, or 1TB or 2x (did you notice the back of the video card boards have the SSD?)
IMO, there's a lot that -isn't- said about the Mac Pro,but you can deduce from the images on the Apple site how it's put together already.
The "motherboard" is the part with the I/O on it, the CPU board is behind this, and the RAM sockets are on the CPU board. The video cards are connected via a backplane we don't see in any pictures that is at the bottom of the machine (you can see it faintly through the thermal core picture.)
So my guess is that this is not the only possible configuration. It's entirely possible that Apple within a certain thermal range to upgrade the cpu, as I'm fairly certain the Xeon parts are all socketed. But the price difference between a 4 core and a 6 core still large, 8 core larger still (so 4c=300$,6c=600$,8c=1100$), where as on the 2008 style Mac Pro, a single quad core was the lowest configuration and a 12 core configuration was 2 x 6 cores. Not threads. Sticking two CPU's in the cylinder style Mac Pro is not going to be an option, and I'm not sure if Apple will build a "yet even bigger" model since the multi-cpu models of pretty much everything E5 are rack-mount servers. Not workstations.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/multi_cpu.html
[Dual CPU] Intel Xeon E5645 @ 2.40GHz 10,675 (this would be the top configuration of the old style Mac Pro)
Intel Xeon E5-1660 @ 3.30GHz 12,488 (this is the top configuration for an E5-1660 Sandy Bridge model)
The cost will be killer though. 5K to start, up to 10K/15K USD depending on setup? Way outside what I can afford, but some forward thinking professionals should be able to appreciate it.
Yes, people expecting below-$2500 prices aren't doing the math: If you put the price of a new generation Xeon, plus two new gen AMD boards, plus flash storage which is much faster than the newest SSDs, plus very fast RAM... I hate to tell this, but I cannot see all of this fitting below 3K. But I hope the entry isn't at 5K either. The closer they approach to 5K, the closer they'll get to the G4 cube failure. The more they approach 2K in the entry model, the more the'll get to selling these new boxes in huge, huge, huge amounts...
So I hope there's an entry configuration not far away from $2500. Otherwise, I see it too risky, and prone to a commercial failure.
The reason we will never see a Linux version of anything is because Linux is a constantly moving target with hundreds of fragmentations. We see this "nothing new to see here" with Android fragmentation. If Adobe builds a Windows version of CS Suite, they know it will work on all current versions that Microsoft still offers support for. Likewise on Mac OS X. Linux there is no such thing. Most people don't have the patience to fiddle on Linux to make things work. This is why the entirety of Linux that people are using are in embedded devices and servers controlled with web browsers. Linux is and always will be a unsupported platform for the desktop. You can lay the blame for that at the GPL Licence shenanigans.
It's called Enterprise Red Hat. Today's Linux is not much different than Sun OS from 20 years ago and also very similar to the current OS X. Adobe used to make Illustrator for Sun OS back in the 90's. I would settle for just Ai, Ps, ID, Pr and, Au as individual titles. The more I look at the new Mac Pro, the more I just want to bail on Apple. That design is really impractical. It is way over the top. That is not innovation, that is simply an example of over engineering. It really only serves one purpose - So Phil can say "lack of innovation, my ass" in the keynote. People around here were clamoring for a Mac Mini Pro, well you got your wish. I predict it will not sell well at all.
There has never been a better time for Adobe to release Creative Suite for Linux. Personally I like big cases and motherboards that I can build to suit my needs. Hackintosh is probably not an option going forward, but neither is this new Mac Pro in my opinion. 4K video and thunderbolt are not exclusive to Apple. Premier is already 4K capable. TB2 will also be available on other boards around the same time.
linux is not the option either.
Clearly you belong to the past, stay there. This machine isn't for guys like you.
Clearly you belong to the past, stay there. This machine isn't for guys like you.
Actually, I could use Linux for my work (it's been my everyday OS for number crunching not long ago), but, even if I choose Linux, I believe I'd still buy this new Mac Pro better than a PC. Why? Thermal design, silence, and performance. There's no way I can have such three things with a PC. The new Mac Pro is the best choice. Even if I wasn't going to use OSX, I'd still choose it (IIRC, a massive lot of Windows people consider Macbooks are the best laptops for using Windows, and IMHO this will be true for this new Mac Pro).
Anyway, if anybody can show me how can I mount a high performance CPU, with a high performance GPU, while still getting absolute silence, please tell me what PC parts should I buy, please (and, no please, don't suggest me liquid cooling, it's far noisier than a good fan).
I'm using an original Mac Pro. I go through a GPU about every 18 months. They overheat and die. I've had one FB-DIMM go on me, and I've added a SSD.
The only worry on that list is the GPU. Do I really have to buy two of them? And do they really have to be these high-end versions? And when one of the blows, and they will, how am I going to replace it?
Apple could barely get support for the Mac Pro in current revs and all it takes is a firmware flash. The chance of there being 3rd party option in the new design is exactly zero.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkVader
Pros want multiple processors.
...
Think about what they could have done with this in the existing case: Dual 12 core processors. Up to 128GB RAM. 2 solid state drives AND 4 hard drives. And two Blu-Ray drives. And 4 PCI Express slots.
Yes, why just one processor, the 12 core model will cost a fortune.
And a new motherboard in with the actual design could give you easily 256GB ram
My organization is a "Pro" user. The data we collect and reduce is measured in tens of terabytes per week.
We do highway data collection for DOTs, in an effort that is sometimes referred to as Geospatial Mobile Mapping. Our dual LiDAR, 3X8meg camera systems previously needed an 8 Core Xserve to operate successfully. We now do the same thing with a loaded solid state Mac Mini using a Thunderbolt expansion box and a 4 bay USB3 removable hard drive bay. We needed to change our approach as there wasn't a perfect solution available to us after the loss of the Xserve. The Mac Pro was a good engine but access to the storage bays was cumbersome at best and there wasn't USB3 or Thunderbolt. All of our data comes out of the vehicles as raw removable hard drives and is then loaded onto Promise raids at the office. It is distributed through an array of Xserves to over 80 27 inch iMacs for data reduction (analysis and extraction of asset information). We also have a sensor package that does automated 3D pavement analysis but that system forces us to move to the Mac Pro for the pure horsepower and throughput needed to resolve the final solution.
Our process was forced to evolve as we searched for the best technological solution. Since our whole methodology (software and hardware) is so tightly coupled to Apple and the Mac OS, I was very concerned about what was going to come in the next generation of the Mac Pro package. Funny thing. I think they nailed it. Now there is an inexpensive base system in the Mac Mini and a nice high end engine in the new Mac Pro. All of our storage is external and removable and we have a functional methodology for handling it on both machines. In fact, now, all of our peripheral components will be interchangeable between both boxes giving us a nice power curve choice.
Although our workflow model is more dense than the one that many video and film professionals use, it would easily scale to those environments. Consider the new Mac Pro as a high end computing engine. Storage can be local on an external box or on a raid in a server room for multiple workstation collaboration. It is much easier for us to manage the "Big Data" off of the servers. The one place that I am not to sure about implementing the new Mac Pro is as a file server in the rack of the server room to replace our current Xserves. That solution is yet to be explored as we learn more about this hot new package from our favorite fruit company.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
However it would have been a very positive thing for Apple to have put in a second slot for their high speed SSDs.
http://cdn.thenextweb.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2013/06/IMG_8197.jpg
This image shows the two GPU boards; on the right hand one we see the SDD blade; on the left hand one we can see the pads where a second SSD blade could be added in…
And for those lamenting the fact that the new Mac Pro is now a single CPU machine; ask yourself why did Apple go to dual CPUs in the first place? Maybe something to do with the fact that CPUs were single core items in the past, so running dual CPUs was the only way to get multiple cores in the box…
Now we all can just only wait and see what new info comes out the closer Apple gets to actually releasing this new sexy beast…!
Quote:
Originally Posted by kpluck
I am going to go out on a limb and suggest professionals looking for a workstation don't have "marvel of packaging" high on their list of wanted features. The design of this machine was not done to meet the needs of professionals. It was done for Apple's need to minimize upgradeability to keep people buying new machines every few years.
Don't get me wrong, I think the design is cool and I think they will probably sell a lot of them. Lets face it, there are a lot of professional Apple users that will buy whatever Apple throws at them and learn to deal with any limitations it may have. From a business standpoint, I think it is an amazing design. But from a professional user standpoint, it is horrible.
I am rather curious how long Apple can keep this kind of thing going and how long Apple users will keep accepting it? Maybe indefinitely I suppose. Time will tell.
-kpluck
So sit one inside an old Mac Pro case and stuff the rest of the empty space with thunderbolt 2 stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkevwill
I hope some of the supposed experts replying here, understand the expandability of thunderbolt ports. Including, external PCI enclosures, with any PCI device you want to throw in there.
For musicians, sound recordists and film makers it is often crucial to have everything in one box. Just imagine you go onto a location and first of all you have to wire up all the external gear, drives, video cards (red-rocket, black-magic, avid, ...), audio interfaces (pro-tools, ...), etc., half of it coming with an external power supply. That is a great hassle and a constant source of potential problems. How often do you see a Mac Pro standing in a dark corner of a stage or in the back of a production van working away. That won't be possible with the Mac Pro X or whatever it is called. Just something Apple could consider.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Originally Posted by Jeff Fields
There are zero Firewire 800 ports, not two as stated in the article.
There are two Ethernet ports; the article is vague on this.
The article's vague because its author thinks Ethernet is FireWire 800.
Originally Posted by DarkVader
That has to be the worst possible design for a pro machine that I could imagine.
This proves that Apple has done 100% the right thing.
Pros don't want cutesy cylinders, they want EXPANSION.
GUESS WHAT THE CYLINDER CAN DO, KIDDO.
Pros still need optical drives.
That's so effing stupid.
Pros want multiple processors.
Pros want a lot of cores. Multiple processors are just a means to that end. You'd know that if you actually knew anything.
Also? There are no single-chip processors with 12 cores from any manufacturer. Not that I can find, anyway. Not Sandy, Ivy, or Haswell.
Think about what they could have done with this in the existing case:
Yeah, they could have made it a worthless update that didn't actually innovate anything and for which they would have been mocked and derided because it was "late".
Instead they punched people like you in the metaphorical face and told you to shut up. This is the future. Deal with it.
Not x86 based, but Tilera has some monster multicore chips. Their TILEPro chips have 36 or 64 cores. They run hot as a sonofabitch of course.
http://www.tilera.com/products/processors/TILEPro_Family
The TILE-Gx comes with 9, 16, 36, or 72 cores.
http://www.tilera.com/products/processors/TILE-Gx_Family
FWIW, I want and will buy one of these. It is more than acceptable to me to expand externally.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Also? There are no single-chip processors with 12 cores from any manufacturer. Not that I can find, anyway. Not Sandy, Ivy, or Haswell.
Actually AMD does, they even have a new 16 core CPU.
http://www.amd.com/us/products/server/processors/6000-series-platform/Pages/6000-series-platform.aspx
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRonin
And for those lamenting the fact that the new Mac Pro is now a single CPU machine; ask yourself why did Apple go to dual CPUs in the first place? Maybe something to do with the fact that CPUs were single core items in the past, so running dual CPUs was the only way to get multiple cores in the box…
No, the first Mac Pro (2006) came with a 2 x 2-core and 2 x 4-core options. Apple is just compromising in this respect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SchnellFowVay
I think everyone in here understands that (or they do now).
But I guess the bigger question that I was raising was simply, "what's the point?"
I have never heard a professional say the Mac Pro was too large. What is great about a small cylinder shape that it outweights the annoyance of having a gazillion external drives and cables?
Maybe if this thing was a true revolution in performance I might be more inclined to say, "yeah, it's worth it." But it's going to use standard, off the shelf Haswell processors that can be found on any other workstation computer. It was like the designers said "hehe, yeah, a small cylinder looks really cool!!" And then when someone from engineering said, "but most professional users don't really care about the shape of the machine," the designers just said, "well let them add external drives!!!"
Again, it's probably going to be a great machine. It's much easier to see the utility when Apple reduces the size of Macbooks, ipads, etc. I just don't see what the huge advantage is of making this thing so tiny that it lacks built-in features that many pros need and rely on.
Bingo.
The last thing us "retarded pros" want is more cables around the desk.
The only thing I didn't like with the 'cheese grater' towers is the dust issue. I'm looking at this design and thinking it's not going to work out too well being on the floor with dust/hair/particles/coffee and all other elements that are affected by gravity - meaning this thing is meant to be on the desk... with a mess of cables and external devices strewn all over the place.
A big box with everything tucked away nicely inside it... locked up... does have its merits.
And what if thunderbolt isn't supported by the industry and there is no plethora of devices?
I'm very strongly recommending a 'Wait for rev2' on this tower.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rain
Bingo.
The last thing us "retarded pros" want is more cables around the desk.
The only thing I didn't like with the 'cheese grater' towers is the dust issue. I'm looking at this design and thinking it's not going to work out too well being on the floor with dust/hair/particles/coffee and all other elements that are affected by gravity - meaning this thing is meant to be on the desk... with a mess of cables and external devices strewn all over the place.
A big box with everything tucked away nicely inside it... locked up... does have its merits.
And what if thunderbolt isn't supported by the industry and there is no plethora of devices?
I'm very strongly recommending a 'Wait for rev2' on this tower.
Well, there are the following products already on the market.
Several mfg of external drives and drive arrays. G Tech, Drobo, Promise, LaCie, ATTO, Buffalo Tech, Elgato, Seagate, and others
Belkin, Matrox Thunderbolt docking station
Sonnet, OWC Mercury, Magma PCI expansion chassis
Thunderbolt monitor (duh)
Universal Audio Apollo 16
Blackmagic Cinema Camera
There are also adapter cables to transform Thunderbolt into another type of I/O with a simple adapter cable.
Obviously, there will be more devices, but as always, a new i/O takes time for it to gain traction. But I think it's best suited for the DAW and Video production crowds mainly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRonin
And for those lamenting the fact that the new Mac Pro is now a single CPU machine; ask yourself why did Apple go to dual CPUs in the first place? Maybe something to do with the fact that CPUs were single core items in the past, so running dual CPUs was the only way to get multiple cores in the box…
Quote:
Originally Posted by glnf
No, the first Mac Pro (2006) came with a 2 x 2-core and 2 x 4-core options. Apple is just compromising in this respect.
I was actually think further back, to the days of Motorola and the PowerPC CPUs…
Quote:
Originally Posted by glnf
No, the first Mac Pro (2006) came with a 2 x 2-core and 2 x 4-core options. Apple is just compromising in this respect.
Since there are no 12 core Xeon processors coming up, this device should be a dual CPU design.
If I had one wish it would be to have the power cord socket on the back - and 1/2 of all the connector sockets (Thunderbolt 2 and USB 3) on the front. I don't look forward to spinning this around with all the cables attached at the back.
I feel very strange. Very strange. I've been bashing iToys for years. I bashed the new iMac as well. And the new Mac Mini too...
...but...
Today... I can only say I love this new machine...
Apple, congratulations, this is the desktop I wanted, and I believe it's exactly the desktop the performance-demanding market wants. Now don't miss it with a wrong price, please. Either surprise us with an unbeatable price, or make it scalable so that there's an entry model not far away from the older Mac Pro prices.
The reason we will never see a Linux version of anything is because Linux is a constantly moving target with hundreds of fragmentations. We see this "nothing new to see here" with Android fragmentation. If Adobe builds a Windows version of CS Suite, they know it will work on all current versions that Microsoft still offers support for. Likewise on Mac OS X. Linux there is no such thing. Most people don't have the patience to fiddle on Linux to make things work. This is why the entirety of Linux that people are using are in embedded devices and servers controlled with web browsers. Linux is and always will be a unsupported platform for the desktop. You can lay the blame for that at the GPL Licence shenanigans.
As for the Mac Pro, the way I see it is that the 3 boards seen in the illustrations , one is the CPU board (the one with the RAM) and the other two boards are the video cards. These boards can likely be replaced, and are probably all placed initially in BYO configurations. So what Apple showed today was likely the top or middle configuration.
Also I believe that SSD socket is a just a PCIe socket. It's not a SATA port. It's likely designed in a way to allow replacement of the SSD when it wears out.
Like what I expect is Apple will release something like this BYO:
22nm IVY Bridge E5-1600 v2 or E5-2600 v2 with 6 cores as stock (4 or 8 and 12 core optional)
32GB 1866Mhz ECC DDR3L ram (upgradeable to 64GB)
AMD FirePro W9000 x 2 (6GB ea) (configurable as single board, or dual board)
SSD configuration of 128GB, 256GB, 512GB, or 1TB or 2x (did you notice the back of the video card boards have the SSD?)
IMO, there's a lot that -isn't- said about the Mac Pro,but you can deduce from the images on the Apple site how it's put together already.
The "motherboard" is the part with the I/O on it, the CPU board is behind this, and the RAM sockets are on the CPU board. The video cards are connected via a backplane we don't see in any pictures that is at the bottom of the machine (you can see it faintly through the thermal core picture.)
So my guess is that this is not the only possible configuration. It's entirely possible that Apple within a certain thermal range to upgrade the cpu, as I'm fairly certain the Xeon parts are all socketed. But the price difference between a 4 core and a 6 core still large, 8 core larger still (so 4c=300$,6c=600$,8c=1100$), where as on the 2008 style Mac Pro, a single quad core was the lowest configuration and a 12 core configuration was 2 x 6 cores. Not threads. Sticking two CPU's in the cylinder style Mac Pro is not going to be an option, and I'm not sure if Apple will build a "yet even bigger" model since the multi-cpu models of pretty much everything E5 are rack-mount servers. Not workstations.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/multi_cpu.html
[Dual CPU] Intel Xeon E5645 @ 2.40GHz 10,675 (this would be the top configuration of the old style Mac Pro)
Intel Xeon E5-1660 @ 3.30GHz 12,488 (this is the top configuration for an E5-1660 Sandy Bridge model)
If you notice "with configurations up to 12 cores" on the Website, I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume Intel is making an Ivy Bridge 12 core part (http://vr-zone.com/articles/exclusive-update--ivy-bridge-eep-die-to-have-12-cores-not-10-/17314.html ). So double that E5 score.
As for the release date, likely around September, since the E5 Ivy Bridge-E parts aren't due till "third quarter 2013"
Quote:
Originally Posted by JollyPaul
The cost will be killer though. 5K to start, up to 10K/15K USD depending on setup? Way outside what I can afford, but some forward thinking professionals should be able to appreciate it.
Yes, people expecting below-$2500 prices aren't doing the math: If you put the price of a new generation Xeon, plus two new gen AMD boards, plus flash storage which is much faster than the newest SSDs, plus very fast RAM... I hate to tell this, but I cannot see all of this fitting below 3K. But I hope the entry isn't at 5K either. The closer they approach to 5K, the closer they'll get to the G4 cube failure. The more they approach 2K in the entry model, the more the'll get to selling these new boxes in huge, huge, huge amounts...
So I hope there's an entry configuration not far away from $2500. Otherwise, I see it too risky, and prone to a commercial failure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misa
The reason we will never see a Linux version of anything is because Linux is a constantly moving target with hundreds of fragmentations. We see this "nothing new to see here" with Android fragmentation. If Adobe builds a Windows version of CS Suite, they know it will work on all current versions that Microsoft still offers support for. Likewise on Mac OS X. Linux there is no such thing. Most people don't have the patience to fiddle on Linux to make things work. This is why the entirety of Linux that people are using are in embedded devices and servers controlled with web browsers. Linux is and always will be a unsupported platform for the desktop. You can lay the blame for that at the GPL Licence shenanigans.
It's called Enterprise Red Hat. Today's Linux is not much different than Sun OS from 20 years ago and also very similar to the current OS X. Adobe used to make Illustrator for Sun OS back in the 90's. I would settle for just Ai, Ps, ID, Pr and, Au as individual titles. The more I look at the new Mac Pro, the more I just want to bail on Apple. That design is really impractical. It is way over the top. That is not innovation, that is simply an example of over engineering. It really only serves one purpose - So Phil can say "lack of innovation, my ass" in the keynote. People around here were clamoring for a Mac Mini Pro, well you got your wish. I predict it will not sell well at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Quote:
Originally Posted by nonstopdesign
oh man....
There has never been a better time for Adobe to release Creative Suite for Linux. Personally I like big cases and motherboards that I can build to suit my needs. Hackintosh is probably not an option going forward, but neither is this new Mac Pro in my opinion. 4K video and thunderbolt are not exclusive to Apple. Premier is already 4K capable. TB2 will also be available on other boards around the same time.
linux is not the option either.
Clearly you belong to the past, stay there. This machine isn't for guys like you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins
linux is not the option either.
Clearly you belong to the past, stay there. This machine isn't for guys like you.
Actually, I could use Linux for my work (it's been my everyday OS for number crunching not long ago), but, even if I choose Linux, I believe I'd still buy this new Mac Pro better than a PC. Why? Thermal design, silence, and performance. There's no way I can have such three things with a PC. The new Mac Pro is the best choice. Even if I wasn't going to use OSX, I'd still choose it (IIRC, a massive lot of Windows people consider Macbooks are the best laptops for using Windows, and IMHO this will be true for this new Mac Pro).
Anyway, if anybody can show me how can I mount a high performance CPU, with a high performance GPU, while still getting absolute silence, please tell me what PC parts should I buy, please (and, no please, don't suggest me liquid cooling, it's far noisier than a good fan).
The only worry on that list is the GPU. Do I really have to buy two of them? And do they really have to be these high-end versions? And when one of the blows, and they will, how am I going to replace it?
Apple could barely get support for the Mac Pro in current revs and all it takes is a firmware flash. The chance of there being 3rd party option in the new design is exactly zero.