The speed advantage for the SSD by using 4x connections is ALSO present in the 1TB MacBook Pro (Retina Display). It is faster than the other MacBook Pro (Retina Display) SSD options (256GB and 512GB)
Ohhh... I missed that post by Relic. Very sorry to read that! Relic and I locked horns on a few occasions, but I really enjoyed her well-reasoned posts -- she gave as good as she got!
I also missed her post about " her first adventures at CalTech." Do you have a link -- I grew up in Pasadena a couple of miles from CalTech, and my business partner's father was a graduate.
I hope Relic recovers and contributes for many more years.
Ha! It occurs to me that Relic had more tech devices than DaHarder! -- Only hers were real!
Here it is, actually a page of Relic, including me giving her a hard time. Anyway, post #71.
Thanks for this! It is a very enjoyable read. I lived in Pasadena from 1950 - 1963. My parents lived there until 2003. I just checked, and their house was less than 3 miles from Caltech.
I suspect that @Relic is closer to my age and we may have shared some of the same interests in the same places of Pasadena and the area in general. It would have been fun to participate in that thread and maybe draw @Relic into a little bit of nostalgics.
So you people think Apple buying Adobe would be a good idea? Are you not paying attention to Apple's lousy software track record? Look how they dumbed down iMovie, Final Cut Pro, and iWork by removing features that people used to get their work done. So you want them to strip features from Photoshop and Illustrator and then have the nerve to call them professional-grade products? That is what would happen if Apple bought Adobe. Now after customer backlash, Apple is working to restore the features they removed from those products. Apple needs to stop dumbing-down all their software products.
Apple stripping features from Photoshop and Illustrator what?? Why would they do that? Adobe is the de-facto graphics software. Having the best graphics software and having the best hardware (Mac Pro) to back it up is what is should be about. Graphics started on the Mac years ago...what a great way to keep the momentum going by having Apple buy Adobe. It would make all the PeeCee users jealous as hell. And add to Apple's arsenal.
And the sad thing is, the price is actually not out of whack at all for what you get. In fact, it's a bargain!
No, it's not--the blogs that say it is a bargain fall all over themselves to make it look that way. However, it's kinda tough right now to build a system with 6 TB2 ports or to build such a powerful system that's that small. If that's what you need, you'll have to buy the new MP. If you've got a few custom configuration skills, you can build a more powerful and more (internally) expandable system for the same price or less.
Had a play with one today in the Barcelona Apple store. Don't much like the glossy look, would be much better with a matte finish IMO. Otherwise it's beautiful though, and blazed through everything I did on it in FCPX for the few minutes I had.
I laugh at those asking how it plays games. BHAHAHA!
All work and no play makes.... well you know the rest.
Unfortunately the Mac Pro is only good value for some professionals. Those who need more CPU than GPU power have been left with no choice but to switch operating systems or build a hackintosh.
One industry that's been left in a tough spot is large scale iOS app development because they're forced to use Mac hardware. If you're building dozens of apps you need as many CPU cores and as much RAM as you can throw at the problem and graphics are irrelevant. The old Xserve was the ideal machine: two CPU sockets, 12 RAM slots, multiple drive bays, rack mountable, cheap graphics designed to be used without a display attached. A single powerful machine is also the ideal from a management and administration standpoint.
There is definitely an opportunity here for a third-party solution, but it seems Apple just stopped designing once they got to the I/O ports. They create this stunningly beautiful machine, that I want to display on my desk without interruption, yet I need my monitors, ethernet, power cable, the odd USB to iPad/iPhone cable, and audio line to connect to it and it's not pretty. Before, my Mac sat on the floor with the tangled mess nicely out of view. Now it's prominently displayed for everyone. It seems very short-sighted and un-Apple.
This woven sleeving hides bunches of cables. It has a nice black cloth finish and is split so cables can enter and exit the bundle easily. I used this in the post house I once managed all the time to clean the cable crap.
I laugh at those asking how it plays games. BHAHAHA!
All work and no play makes.... well you know the rest.
Unfortunately the Mac Pro is only good value for some professionals. Those who need more CPU than GPU power have been left with no choice but to switch operating systems or build a hackintosh.
One industry that's been left in a tough spot is large scale iOS app development because they're forced to use Mac hardware. If you're building dozens of apps you need as many CPU cores and as much RAM as you can throw at the problem and graphics are irrelevant. The old Xserve was the ideal machine: two CPU sockets, 12 RAM slots, multiple drive bays, rack mountable, cheap graphics designed to be used without a display attached. A single powerful machine is also the ideal from a management and administration standpoint.
According to what I've read. the new Mac Pro can be configured for at least $1,000 less than a DIY equivalent. For example:
CPU - 2.7GHz 12-core with 30MB of L3 cache
64 GB of 1866 DDR ECC RAM
256GB PCIe-based flash storage
Dual AMD FirePro D300 GPUs with 2GB of GDDR5 VRAM each
Apple controls the IDE/SDK for iOS app development. It is possible that Apple could maximize the "CPU Cores" of the New Mac Pro by reimplementing the iOS development software to use GPGPU computing -- where the GPUs assume some of the work of the CPUs
Honest questions:
Can you build or buy an equal or better CPU, RAM, I/O combination... graphics aside?
Would a GPGPU implementation of the iOS development process satisfy the needs of the "large scale iOS app development" industry?
Don't you think that, with the A7 and follow-on APUs that iOS apps will become more graphic intensive -- and require GPU power for mass development and testing?
Those who need more CPU than GPU power have been left with no choice but to switch operating systems or build a hackintosh.
One industry that's been left in a tough spot is large scale iOS app development because they're forced to use Mac hardware. If you're building dozens of apps you need as many CPU cores and as much RAM as you can throw at the problem and graphics are irrelevant.
Apple uses the same CPUs as their competition and are price competitive. The only problem is topping out at 12-cores at $6500 for CPU tasks where the D300 GPU adds minimal expense and this was around the same with the old one: $6200, 12-cores. If they went 24-core, it would be over $10k and they haven't been at that price point before.
The old solution of buying more than one is still an option. Rendering, encoding, raw processing can be split across machines and IP over Thunderbolt will run at 20Gbps although will write to the SSD at around 1GB/s.
The "excellent" value for prosumers thing is a head-scratcher. This is a machine for pros. The only reason for a prosumer to buy one is bragging rights. There's nothing really wrong with that, but a 27" iMac is a very good machine and owners do not have to pay a grand in order to have a great display and another hundred for a keyboard and mouse, and another hundred or so for storage space for all their downloaded movies.
Apple controls the IDE/SDK for iOS app development. It is possible that Apple could maximize the "CPU Cores" of the New Mac Pro by reimplementing the iOS development software to use GPGPU computing -- where the GPUs assume some of the work of the CPUs
Honest questions:
Can you build or buy an equal or better CPU, RAM, I/O combination... graphics aside?
Would a GPGPU implementation of the iOS development process satisfy the needs of the "large scale iOS app development" industry?
Don't you think that, with the A7 and follow-on APUs that iOS apps will become more graphic intensive -- and require GPU power for mass development and testing?
I don't write code or manage servers so what follows is things I've heard from people closer to those jobs.
What I've heard is that all servers these days (file servers, web servers and possibly build servers) aren't actually dedicated pieces of equipment, but exist as virtual machines that can be independently rebooted or moved around as needed. If that's the case then the real hardware is likely running Linux or Windows Server plus VMWare. The virtual machines could easily be a combination of different OSs, Linux for web and data serving, Windows for desktop, console and Android development. I don't think you're allowed to run an OS X virtual machine on a Linux server so supporting iOS development probably means putting one or more Macs into the server room.
1. I've read on other sites that the Mac Pro is well priced as a workstation. As a VM host, however, it's not the most suitable form factor or configuration. I don't buy servers so I don't know how they compare price wise.
2. I don't think OS X, VMWare or Xcode are able to take advantage of a GPU for computing tasks. Rewriting Xcode to harness the GPU would help some developers for sure. Those running multiple projects simultaneously on virtual servers would have to weigh the benefit of faster building against the cost of buying and maintaining real hardware instead. I think big companies run their builds overnight so they would likely stick with virtual servers.
3. I don't know the relationship between the hardware used to write software and the hardware it eventually runs on. I think they're fairly independent.
Apple controls the IDE/SDK for iOS app development. It is possible that Apple could maximize the "CPU Cores" of the New Mac Pro by reimplementing the iOS development software to use GPGPU computing -- where the GPUs assume some of the work of the CPUs
Honest questions:
Can you build or buy an equal or better CPU, RAM, I/O combination... graphics aside?
Would a GPGPU implementation of the iOS development process satisfy the needs of the "large scale iOS app development" industry?
Don't you think that, with the A7 and follow-on APUs that iOS apps will become more graphic intensive -- and require GPU power for mass development and testing?
I don't write code or manage servers so what follows is things I've heard from people closer to those jobs.
What I've heard is that all servers these days (file servers, web servers and possibly build servers) aren't actually dedicated pieces of equipment, but exist as virtual machines that can be independently rebooted or moved around as needed. If that's the case then the real hardware is likely running Linux or Windows Server plus VMWare. The virtual machines could easily be a combination of different OSs, Linux for web and data serving, Windows for desktop, console and Android development. I don't think you're allowed to run an OS X virtual machine on a Linux server so supporting iOS development probably means putting one or more Macs into the server room.
1. I've read on other sites that the Mac Pro is well priced as a workstation. As a VM host, however, it's not the most suitable form factor or configuration. I don't buy servers so I don't know how they compare price wise.
2. I don't think OS X, VMWare or Xcode are able to take advantage of a GPU for computing tasks. Rewriting Xcode to harness the GPU would help some developers for sure. Those running multiple projects simultaneously on virtual servers would have to weigh the benefit of faster building against the cost of buying and maintaining real hardware instead. I think big companies run their builds overnight so they would likely stick with virtual servers.
3. I don't know the relationship between the hardware used to write software and the hardware it eventually runs on. I think they're fairly independent.
Good points all....
I guess the answer is "it depends".
Here's an interesting read – it compares upgraded older Mac Pros against the new Mac Pro and running various benchmarks. The last comparison is an Xcode job.
Poppycock! I've been an apple fan since my Mac 128K in 1984, but my eyes are not blinded like the rest of yours are that I am unable to see how awful that reflective case looks in virtually any environment! It looks absolutely horrible! Even if I had the money and the desire to buy this machine, which I do not, I would avoid buying it for that reason alone. Put a matte finish on it with a slightly glossy coat to solve the problem, for goodness sake!
looking at the first picture in the article, all I could think of was that guy selling a tea kettle on eBay a few years back...
Thank you, Chris, and for following up with Robin as well.
It's strange how we can form attachments through this forum. I was glad rhat Robin could provide a name and place for Relic. It made such a difference somehow.
Comments
@Flaneur
Thanks for this! It is a very enjoyable read. I lived in Pasadena from 1950 - 1963. My parents lived there until 2003. I just checked, and their house was less than 3 miles from Caltech.
I suspect that @Relic is closer to my age and we may have shared some of the same interests in the same places of Pasadena and the area in general. It would have been fun to participate in that thread and maybe draw @Relic into a little bit of nostalgics.
So you people think Apple buying Adobe would be a good idea? Are you not paying attention to Apple's lousy software track record? Look how they dumbed down iMovie, Final Cut Pro, and iWork by removing features that people used to get their work done. So you want them to strip features from Photoshop and Illustrator and then have the nerve to call them professional-grade products? That is what would happen if Apple bought Adobe. Now after customer backlash, Apple is working to restore the features they removed from those products. Apple needs to stop dumbing-down all their software products.
Apple stripping features from Photoshop and Illustrator what?? Why would they do that? Adobe is the de-facto graphics software. Having the best graphics software and having the best hardware (Mac Pro) to back it up is what is should be about. Graphics started on the Mac years ago...what a great way to keep the momentum going by having Apple buy Adobe. It would make all the PeeCee users jealous as hell. And add to Apple's arsenal.
Apple buys Adobe.....A match made in heaven, bro.
And the sad thing is, the price is actually not out of whack at all for what you get. In fact, it's a bargain!
No, it's not--the blogs that say it is a bargain fall all over themselves to make it look that way. However, it's kinda tough right now to build a system with 6 TB2 ports or to build such a powerful system that's that small. If that's what you need, you'll have to buy the new MP. If you've got a few custom configuration skills, you can build a more powerful and more (internally) expandable system for the same price or less.
I laugh at those asking how it plays games. BHAHAHA!
All work and no play makes.... well you know the rest.
Unfortunately the Mac Pro is only good value for some professionals. Those who need more CPU than GPU power have been left with no choice but to switch operating systems or build a hackintosh.
One industry that's been left in a tough spot is large scale iOS app development because they're forced to use Mac hardware. If you're building dozens of apps you need as many CPU cores and as much RAM as you can throw at the problem and graphics are irrelevant. The old Xserve was the ideal machine: two CPU sockets, 12 RAM slots, multiple drive bays, rack mountable, cheap graphics designed to be used without a display attached. A single powerful machine is also the ideal from a management and administration standpoint.
There is definitely an opportunity here for a third-party solution, but it seems Apple just stopped designing once they got to the I/O ports. They create this stunningly beautiful machine, that I want to display on my desk without interruption, yet I need my monitors, ethernet, power cable, the odd USB to iPad/iPhone cable, and audio line to connect to it and it's not pretty. Before, my Mac sat on the floor with the tangled mess nicely out of view. Now it's prominently displayed for everyone. It seems very short-sighted and un-Apple.
This woven sleeving hides bunches of cables. It has a nice black cloth finish and is split so cables can enter and exit the bundle easily. I used this in the post house I once managed all the time to clean the cable crap.
http://www.cableorganizer.com/woven-wrap/
According to what I've read. the new Mac Pro can be configured for at least $1,000 less than a DIY equivalent. For example:
Prices out at $7,799.00
Apple controls the IDE/SDK for iOS app development. It is possible that Apple could maximize the "CPU Cores" of the New Mac Pro by reimplementing the iOS development software to use GPGPU computing -- where the GPUs assume some of the work of the CPUs
Honest questions:
The new one did ok with compiling:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7603/mac-pro-review-late-2013/5
Firefox with 10 million lines of code compiled in just under 5.5 minutes. There's a chart of codebases here:
http://www.crunchyfriday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/1276_lines_of_code5.png
Android itself is listed as just over 10 million.
Apple uses the same CPUs as their competition and are price competitive. The only problem is topping out at 12-cores at $6500 for CPU tasks where the D300 GPU adds minimal expense and this was around the same with the old one: $6200, 12-cores. If they went 24-core, it would be over $10k and they haven't been at that price point before.
The old solution of buying more than one is still an option. Rendering, encoding, raw processing can be split across machines and IP over Thunderbolt will run at 20Gbps although will write to the SSD at around 1GB/s.
Cool, looks promising.
Choppy. Very choppy desktop experience.
According to what I've read. the new Mac Pro can be configured for at least $1,000 less than a DIY equivalent. For example:
Prices out at $7,799.00
Apple controls the IDE/SDK for iOS app development. It is possible that Apple could maximize the "CPU Cores" of the New Mac Pro by reimplementing the iOS development software to use GPGPU computing -- where the GPUs assume some of the work of the CPUs
Honest questions:
I don't write code or manage servers so what follows is things I've heard from people closer to those jobs.
What I've heard is that all servers these days (file servers, web servers and possibly build servers) aren't actually dedicated pieces of equipment, but exist as virtual machines that can be independently rebooted or moved around as needed. If that's the case then the real hardware is likely running Linux or Windows Server plus VMWare. The virtual machines could easily be a combination of different OSs, Linux for web and data serving, Windows for desktop, console and Android development. I don't think you're allowed to run an OS X virtual machine on a Linux server so supporting iOS development probably means putting one or more Macs into the server room.
1. I've read on other sites that the Mac Pro is well priced as a workstation. As a VM host, however, it's not the most suitable form factor or configuration. I don't buy servers so I don't know how they compare price wise.
2. I don't think OS X, VMWare or Xcode are able to take advantage of a GPU for computing tasks. Rewriting Xcode to harness the GPU would help some developers for sure. Those running multiple projects simultaneously on virtual servers would have to weigh the benefit of faster building against the cost of buying and maintaining real hardware instead. I think big companies run their builds overnight so they would likely stick with virtual servers.
3. I don't know the relationship between the hardware used to write software and the hardware it eventually runs on. I think they're fairly independent.
Good points all....
I guess the answer is "it depends".
Here's an interesting read – it compares upgraded older Mac Pros against the new Mac Pro and running various benchmarks. The last comparison is an Xcode job.
http://www.macworld.com/article/2084814/breathing-new-life-into-old-mac-pros.html
They are thicker because they are multilayer boards.
"Beautiful," "exquisite," "sexy," "revolutionary."
Poppycock! I've been an apple fan since my Mac 128K in 1984, but my eyes are not blinded like the rest of yours are that I am unable to see how awful that reflective case looks in virtually any environment! It looks absolutely horrible! Even if I had the money and the desire to buy this machine, which I do not, I would avoid buying it for that reason alone. Put a matte finish on it with a slightly glossy coat to solve the problem, for goodness sake!
looking at the first picture in the article, all I could think of was that guy selling a tea kettle on eBay a few years back...
Thanks, no, I haven't.
Hey Robin, Were you able to locate your friend in Switzerland? I hope so.
Best.
Phil Boogie steered him to this thread started by relic, which i'm sorry to say was probably among her last words with us on this earth.
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/158838/well-it-looks-like-im-no-longer-in-remission
Robin, did you see this? It's from Flaneur. I'm so sorry.
Chris
Phil Boogie steered him to this thread started by relic, which i'm sorry to say was probably among her last words with us on this earth.
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/158838/well-it-looks-like-im-no-longer-in-remission
She really was a delightful person. I became very fond of her after she told us of her first adventures at CalTech.
Thx. Flaneur. Really sorry about Relic.
Best Regards.
Chris
Thank you, Chris, and for following up with Robin as well.
It's strange how we can form attachments through this forum. I was glad rhat Robin could provide a name and place for Relic. It made such a difference somehow.