I'd be willing to bet intel has something in the works for this. Otherwise that's a serious feature missing from their chipset that allt he other chipsets have. Sure they could promote the 7950 g2... but everyone else can promote 2 7950 g2's. *shrugs* I don't really care personally. But I konw many professionals who do.
In PC-land news is that 2 7950g2s (quad SLI) is not officially supported by nVidia. Something to do with the bridging the two cards which individually have a bridge in there already.
Anyway if you wanted 2 7950g2s, it would really only be for gaming PC titles at really high resolutions. Otherwise for Mac Pros you'd just go Quadro. For those seriously into Mac gaming, a single high-end 7series nVidia card would be enough.
....Dual processors used to be one of the selling points of the Power Macs line over the cheaper models, but nearly all of the consumer units have dual processors now. That's why I almost expect the next revision to sport two quad models....
This is a very convincing argument that we'll see only TWO main Quad Mac Pro models.
....Dual processors used to be one of the selling points of the Power Macs line over the cheaper models, but nearly all of the consumer units have dual processors now. That's why I almost expect the next revision to sport two quad models....
This is a very convincing argument that we'll see only TWO main Quad Mac Pro models.
I think that this is really two cores, not two processors. A big difference.
Despite Apple's implied assertions, form doesn't fully follow function on these things. There is a contradiction that an empthy drive bay that people might not use is a waste of space, but somehow the "handles" and "feet" on the corner of cheese grater that nobody can use isn't a waste of space. At best, the handles and feet only to harken back to the previous Powermacs which were kind of a fruity addition for those models too. The G5s case make it worse because they aren't useful as handles unless you wear gloves or put rags around them so they don't pinch the hands when moving it around. The feet don't help me in trucking them around either. My network port went out and I'll have to have a cart or dolly so I can haul my PowerMac accross the mall parking lit to the Apple store, the feet will probably complicate my choice of cart.
I liked the bottom handles of the G4 and G5 because that means that only the handles were scraping the bottom of the floor, rather than the whole bottom surface of the tower...!
Also, I liked the top handles to move it around (the G5 handles are not that bad, IMO) and as (sacrilege!) a nice kind of footrest under the desk, those G4 and G5 top handles....
I think that this is really two cores, not two processors. A big difference.
Yes, I think JeffDM means almost all consumer Macintels have two cores now. And when we talk of Quad Mac Pros, of course that will be two processors with two cores per processor. And it's clear the Quad Mac Pros will only be Woodcrest as apparently Conroe machines cannot have multiple processors. Only one processor with two cores.
Yay! Melgross is back!! Where the HELL were you all this while? (See AppleOutsider thread on your dissapearance)
Also, your post count has suffered. I OWN you now in terms of post count
I liked the bottom handles of the G4 and G5 because that means that only the handles were scraping the bottom of the floor, rather than the whole bottom surface of the tower...![/B]
What touches the floor are four tiny skid pads, the same as with any other tower. I'm not sure how the handles on the Gx towers make them more suitable as a footrest than other towers. The rounded corners on the bottom make the tower less stable and more prone to falling, so knocking them to the side can have worse consequences.
What touches the floor are four tiny skid pads, the same as with any other tower.
Not on the cheaper PC towers They don't have proper skid pads...
OK, then all the PC towers I've owned, and most that I've seen when I was paying attention, had skid pads over metal to floor contact. Even my first computer with a pretty cheap case had them.
OK, then all the PC towers I've owned, and most that I've seen when I was paying attention, had skid pads over metal to floor contact. Even my first computer with a pretty cheap case had them.
The metal feet and handles on the G5's, and the G4's, cost a lot of money to implement. Just how useful they really are for the majority of users, is something I'm skeptical about.
I can't argue that. you are correct to a great extent.
Biut there should be machines for both extremes. I wholeheartedly endorse a one slot machine. But I also would very much want one that is much more expandable. There are video solutions that fit within one machine. Not all production studios are big enough to afford that bank of equipment either. The independent person is beginning to do this work, but needs a less expensive solution than a fully equiped facility.
Wow, there is a first time for everything. We actually agree on something for once. That independent producer sure isn't going to be buying an Xserve RAID or SDI card. I think there's a serious misconception on the part of some here, including JeffDM, that I'm saying all Pro machines should be downsized. I have no problems with the top of the line machines needing to be humongous. But what about your average Photoshop maven who needs more speed than an iMac provides but wouldn't need more than one PCI slot in a million years? Surely the heavy duty video users can afford to buy the top of the line. Indeed, let those buyers have six slots, like the old 9500 (which also had an amazing 12 RAM slots). They're willing to pay for it. Now that would help distinguish the Pro line from the iMacs. All Pros could have four cores to beat the iMacs, but the best model could have internal expansion galore to distinguish it from the "low end" Pro models.
I'm wondering if Apple will redesign the PowerMac towers in light of this transition. Up to this point we've seen nothing more than Intel integration into all current product designs. But the PowerMac was originally designed around the requirements of the G5 processor, a chassis enclosing nine fans, with a large front and back perforated metal facade for direct airflow. Since these Conroe/Woodcrest processors run cooler than the G5 with less power consumption, I suspect Apple may give its towers a makeover now that they are free of this G5's limitations.
The PowerMac G5 case must be the enclosure that has seen no changes for the longest time (or does the iBook get that award?)
Every other enclosure has seen at least a few changes. Sure the El-Capitan and its derivatives case was with us from the G3s to the G4s...but they multiple changes in that time span.
The PowerMac G5 case must be the enclosure that has seen no changes for the longest time (or does the iBook get that award?)
The white iBook design was introduced on May 1st, 2001. It was, however, altered slightly in late 2002 to replace some glossy components with opaque once, slightly alter the color and replace the typeface of "iBook" from Apple Garamond to Myriad. Finally, in late 2003, the iBook G4 caused some design changes, such as the move from a tray drive to a slot-in one.
Still, even the (white) MacBook's overall design is extremely similar to what it was with the May '01 iBook "Dual USB".
But there should be machines for both extremes. I wholeheartedly endorse a one slot machine. But I also would very much want one that is much more expandable. There are video solutions that fit within one machine. Not all production studios are big enough to afford that bank of equipment either.
The independent person is beginning to do this work, but needs a less expensive solution than a fully equiped facility.
absolutely - particularly the last line
some pre-amble (hopefully not too far off thread):
for some 10 years (since the 2nd half of the 90's) there's been a desktop video revolution - comparable to the desktop design revolution of the late 80's / early 90's
Apple's been a big PART of this with FCP & FCS (1/2 a million users and counting) ? however, unlike the DTP revolution which really was started by the Mac & Adobe Postscript, Apple this time is *just* (ironic emph.) a big player & strong influence in a developing market that includes a lot of PC solutions
Apple has always had extraordinary edge over & influence on the world desktop computer industry ? remarkable for a company with a highest ever market share of around 10% (ie: back when the Mac pioneered the desktop graphics revolution), down as far as around 2% (ie: during the mid-to-late-90's doldrums, when cheaper PC hardware running Windoze versions of formerly Mac-only apps from Photoshop to Quark became an option), currently heading back towards 5% and hopefully higher...
iPod, iLife, the digital hub et al. are great in the consumer sector, but...
a recent article in the Wall Str Journal (OMG) highlighted Apple's biggest issue as a company throughout its history: that while it has often (almost always, in fact) been an industry leader, with pioneering products, developing new applications and markets ? it has had serious trouble KEEPING those markets
AppleMatters had an insightful article some months back on why Apple hopefully won't make the same mistakes with the iPod/iTunes success as it did with the Mac itself ? stagnation & expensive proprietry hardware during the 90's being the main ones ? i think the wave of innovation following his Steveness' return & Apple's come-back are indicative that they won't make the same mistakes...
there have over the last 20 years been many valid reasons to pay "Mac-Tax" on Apple as well as 3rd-party Mac hardware, from cutting-edge applications (DTP in the 80's, DTVideo in the 90's) to sometimes-superior proprietry hardware (eg: 68000 32-bit processor in 1984, introduction of SCSI wayyy back in 1985; NuBus before PCI in the PC world - the best desktop graphics were on Mac back then with Radius cards; PowerPC which was well ahead of x86 from the beginning through the 601, 604, G3 era - only being overtaken when Moto dropped the ball with G4 development - back in the lead with G5 for a while, at least...)
however, with IBM dropping the same ball & the move to Intel - the gloves are off: it really now is about OS X & Apple's awesome software vs. Windows on similar Intel hardware
back to the thread: the independent person/small 2-5 person shop is doing a lot of Pro video & motion graphic work these days. FCS with Motion is a superb solution ? it'll keep a lot of us die-hard fans around for a long time
however, there are plenty of the above users (including many colleagues where i'm based) who are happily using Adobe Video suite on Windoze (Premiere, After Effects & Encore vs. Final Cut Pro, Motion & DVD SPro) - many of the above find Mac + FCS + AFX7 very appealing ? but the value & desktop-life of hardware (expandibility, lack of processor upgradeability, etc.) is the major deterrent
to retain & increase the Pro creative market share (not to mention win back a lot of users who went peecee in the 90's), Apple's got to offer fast, market-competitive Pro boxes with serious motherboards & lots of space for internal drives (ie: like the 9500, 9600, even the G4 el Capitan case)
yes, the higher-end video facility will typically have a group of G5's as workstations (and the budget to swap them out for new machines when there's a significant performance improvement) with an Xserve installation in the background
but the smaller 1-5 person shop (a large and still growing market which Apple has helped develop) will want a couple of kick-ass machines with plenty of expandibility ? ie: the ability to install SATA-based RAID internally and go up to a couple of TB within one machine, not to mention adding a second GPU for SLI/CrossFire - an upgradeable processor would seal this deal for many potential Pro switchers... (and tho the extreme tech-minded will love to tinker with ZIF tools, most of these will be delighted to bring the machine into an Apple store and pay for installation & a generous mark-up on the chip price)
in the higher end of this market (and as these smaller design/video shops grow in time as well) the dual 16x PCIe is essential ? to make the Mac a serious 3D design platform as well, not to mention give Shake the real hardware muscle it needs to not only contend with the likes of Discreet's Edit but start eating into the lower-end of the Flame market...
with SGI currently in the red, there's never been a riper time...
so, Apple - a biiig Pro Box with a *highly* expandible line from 1 x Woodcrest (with a spare socket) through to 2 x fastest available, from $2000 ? $4000, but all with the same case & mobo (6 x 3.5"bays, plenty of RAM & PCIe slots) ? will go down really well in a market that's felt a bit neglected of late... not to mention win (pun shamelessly intended) many more Pro switchers...
and, yes - a 21st century mid-range cube or pizza-box, a Mac midi, with video on one PCIe card and a spare for expansion, a range from $1000 ? $2000 (entry level CPU & GPU to top-of-the-line Conroe & an X1600), would be awesome for the midrange user / student or entry-level video&media user/switcher... (or anyone who can't bring themselves to the idea of a *disposable* 17 or 20" LCD monitor)
[i]Anyway if you wanted 2 7950g2s, it would really only be for gaming PC titles at really high resolutions. Otherwise for Mac Pros you'd just go Quadro. For those seriously into Mac gaming, a single high-end 7series nVidia card would be enough.
*yells* I don't want SLI or Crossfire or dual pci-e cards for gaming!!! *spits on games* hehe.
It's funny, everyone immediately jumps on the gaming bandwagon when sli is brought up. I want it for modeling and real time rendering on those models i'm working with. Why can't anyone see how much more beneficial it is to have this stuff in the studio as opposed to adding 30fps on your games *rolls eyes*.
With Steve apparently never having gotten over his NeXT phase, that would be great. It's obvious that he still loves cubes, what with the newest NYC Apple Store having one as an entrance. And the Macbook has just brought in black as the new, um, black. So why not something that looks almost exactly like the original NeXT Cube, 12" on each side and black? That was so far ahead of its time, with no floppy drive and only one optical drive as removable media, giving it a clean exterior that would mesh well with current Apple models. You can't tell me Apple's engineers couldn't squeeze four HD bays and a couple of PCIe slots into that form factor. Heck, with a little imagination, you could pack six bays in there (say three vertically on edge on each side of the optical bay, with the PCI slots below the optical drive, which could let this thing be as little as 8" tall). Add black anodized versions of the aluminum Cinema Displays, and the Cube system of the 80s would be back!
With Steve apparently never having gotten over his NeXT phase, that would be great.
...no doubt Steve Jobs is fond of distinctive form factors, from the original Mac (skip a few generations of above-average beige boxes in the Sculley to Amelio years - tho NeXT did look awesome for that time ) to 3 generations of ever-cooler iMacs (since his return to Apple...)
Quote:
You can't tell me Apple's engineers couldn't squeeze four HD bays and a couple of PCIe slots into that form factor. Heck, with a little imagination, you could pack six bays in there (say three vertically on edge on each side of the optical bay, with the PCI slots below the optical drive, which could let this thing be as little as 8" tall).
...tho the footnotes of Apple history are also full of the conflicts between Steve's ideal concepts and engineering reality... (the RDF has also been known to fuel fans to acts of insanity... )
...here, I'm rooting for a genuine Pro Box for Pro's (I dig my giant cheese-grater - goes GR8 with my studio aesthetic - but just wish i could pack it with more protein )
(AND a new midrange machine in an ever-cool & compact (but think midi not mini) new case - as ever, a computer for human beings, but with comparable value & shelf-life to the Wintel world...)
> Am I the only one who thought that the beige-done-right look of the first PMG3 towers was actually pretty appealing?
That design originated with the PowerMac 8600 and 9600, and it was definitely ahead of its time from an accessibility standpoint. The side popped off, the PCI slots were immediately visible, the drives were all there in a tray that flipped up to reveal the rest of the logic board including the RAM slots. The only hassle was threading new ribbon cable if you ever wanted to change the type of a drive inside (IDE, UW-SCSI). I still have an 8600 and although it's beige I think it looks more advanced than the B&W G3 next to it.
Should Steve Jobs or anybody who knows him ever see this here's the reality: I have been a loyal Macintosh owner since 1992, but Apple didn't see a penny from six of my eight Mac purchases.
I will never buy an all-in-one desktop or a completely unexpandable repackaged notebook like the mini. I don't need the mobility of a notebook and honestly don't like working on one. That leaves only the tower, but I'm not a pro user and can't justify the cost. Therefore I buy used towers.
I really want to buy a new Intel based Mac so I can finally get rid of the beige PC next to my G5, but Apple doesn't make a single machine that appeals to me.
So Steve, when you release that pizza box for the bloggers, the gamers, the rich people who want a 750GB HD hooked up to their home theaters, and all the rest of us, make sure there's a real desktop processor, 3.5" HD and two slots for video and other cards. You'll also start a really nice trend of getting me to buy new Macs.
Comments
I'd be willing to bet intel has something in the works for this. Otherwise that's a serious feature missing from their chipset that allt he other chipsets have. Sure they could promote the 7950 g2... but everyone else can promote 2 7950 g2's. *shrugs* I don't really care personally. But I konw many professionals who do.
In PC-land news is that 2 7950g2s (quad SLI) is not officially supported by nVidia. Something to do with the bridging the two cards which individually have a bridge in there already.
Anyway if you wanted 2 7950g2s, it would really only be for gaming PC titles at really high resolutions. Otherwise for Mac Pros you'd just go Quadro. For those seriously into Mac gaming, a single high-end 7series nVidia card would be enough.
....Dual processors used to be one of the selling points of the Power Macs line over the cheaper models, but nearly all of the consumer units have dual processors now. That's why I almost expect the next revision to sport two quad models....
This is a very convincing argument that we'll see only TWO main Quad Mac Pro models.
Originally posted by sunilraman
Originally posted by JeffDM
....Dual processors used to be one of the selling points of the Power Macs line over the cheaper models, but nearly all of the consumer units have dual processors now. That's why I almost expect the next revision to sport two quad models....
This is a very convincing argument that we'll see only TWO main Quad Mac Pro models.
I think that this is really two cores, not two processors. A big difference.
Despite Apple's implied assertions, form doesn't fully follow function on these things. There is a contradiction that an empthy drive bay that people might not use is a waste of space, but somehow the "handles" and "feet" on the corner of cheese grater that nobody can use isn't a waste of space. At best, the handles and feet only to harken back to the previous Powermacs which were kind of a fruity addition for those models too. The G5s case make it worse because they aren't useful as handles unless you wear gloves or put rags around them so they don't pinch the hands when moving it around. The feet don't help me in trucking them around either. My network port went out and I'll have to have a cart or dolly so I can haul my PowerMac accross the mall parking lit to the Apple store, the feet will probably complicate my choice of cart.
I liked the bottom handles of the G4 and G5 because that means that only the handles were scraping the bottom of the floor, rather than the whole bottom surface of the tower...!
Also, I liked the top handles to move it around (the G5 handles are not that bad, IMO) and as (sacrilege!) a nice kind of footrest under the desk, those G4 and G5 top handles....
I think that this is really two cores, not two processors. A big difference.
Yes, I think JeffDM means almost all consumer Macintels have two cores now. And when we talk of Quad Mac Pros, of course that will be two processors with two cores per processor. And it's clear the Quad Mac Pros will only be Woodcrest as apparently Conroe machines cannot have multiple processors. Only one processor with two cores.
Yay! Melgross is back!! Where the HELL were you all this while? (See AppleOutsider thread on your dissapearance)
Also, your post count has suffered. I OWN you now in terms of post count
Originally posted by sunilraman
I liked the bottom handles of the G4 and G5 because that means that only the handles were scraping the bottom of the floor, rather than the whole bottom surface of the tower...![/B]
What touches the floor are four tiny skid pads, the same as with any other tower. I'm not sure how the handles on the Gx towers make them more suitable as a footrest than other towers. The rounded corners on the bottom make the tower less stable and more prone to falling, so knocking them to the side can have worse consequences.
What touches the floor are four tiny skid pads, the same as with any other tower.
Not on the cheaper PC towers
Originally posted by sunilraman
Originally posted by JeffDM
What touches the floor are four tiny skid pads, the same as with any other tower.
Not on the cheaper PC towers
OK, then all the PC towers I've owned, and most that I've seen when I was paying attention, had skid pads over metal to floor contact. Even my first computer with a pretty cheap case had them.
Originally posted by JeffDM
OK, then all the PC towers I've owned, and most that I've seen when I was paying attention, had skid pads over metal to floor contact. Even my first computer with a pretty cheap case had them.
The metal feet and handles on the G5's, and the G4's, cost a lot of money to implement. Just how useful they really are for the majority of users, is something I'm skeptical about.
Originally posted by melgross
I can't argue that. you are correct to a great extent.
Biut there should be machines for both extremes. I wholeheartedly endorse a one slot machine. But I also would very much want one that is much more expandable. There are video solutions that fit within one machine. Not all production studios are big enough to afford that bank of equipment either. The independent person is beginning to do this work, but needs a less expensive solution than a fully equiped facility.
Wow, there is a first time for everything. We actually agree on something for once. That independent producer sure isn't going to be buying an Xserve RAID or SDI card. I think there's a serious misconception on the part of some here, including JeffDM, that I'm saying all Pro machines should be downsized. I have no problems with the top of the line machines needing to be humongous. But what about your average Photoshop maven who needs more speed than an iMac provides but wouldn't need more than one PCI slot in a million years? Surely the heavy duty video users can afford to buy the top of the line. Indeed, let those buyers have six slots, like the old 9500 (which also had an amazing 12 RAM slots). They're willing to pay for it. Now that would help distinguish the Pro line from the iMacs. All Pros could have four cores to beat the iMacs, but the best model could have internal expansion galore to distinguish it from the "low end" Pro models.
Every other enclosure has seen at least a few changes. Sure the El-Capitan and its derivatives case was with us from the G3s to the G4s...but they multiple changes in that time span.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
The PowerMac G5 case must be the enclosure that has seen no changes for the longest time (or does the iBook get that award?)
The white iBook design was introduced on May 1st, 2001. It was, however, altered slightly in late 2002 to replace some glossy components with opaque once, slightly alter the color and replace the typeface of "iBook" from Apple Garamond to Myriad. Finally, in late 2003, the iBook G4 caused some design changes, such as the move from a tray drive to a slot-in one.
Still, even the (white) MacBook's overall design is extremely similar to what it was with the May '01 iBook "Dual USB".
So yes, the iBook wins.
Originally posted by melgross
But there should be machines for both extremes. I wholeheartedly endorse a one slot machine. But I also would very much want one that is much more expandable. There are video solutions that fit within one machine. Not all production studios are big enough to afford that bank of equipment either.
The independent person is beginning to do this work, but needs a less expensive solution than a fully equiped facility.
absolutely - particularly the last line
some pre-amble (hopefully not too far off thread):
for some 10 years (since the 2nd half of the 90's) there's been a desktop video revolution - comparable to the desktop design revolution of the late 80's / early 90's
Apple's been a big PART of this with FCP & FCS (1/2 a million users and counting) ? however, unlike the DTP revolution which really was started by the Mac & Adobe Postscript, Apple this time is *just* (ironic emph.) a big player & strong influence in a developing market that includes a lot of PC solutions
Apple has always had extraordinary edge over & influence on the world desktop computer industry ? remarkable for a company with a highest ever market share of around 10% (ie: back when the Mac pioneered the desktop graphics revolution), down as far as around 2% (ie: during the mid-to-late-90's doldrums, when cheaper PC hardware running Windoze versions of formerly Mac-only apps from Photoshop to Quark became an option), currently heading back towards 5% and hopefully higher...
iPod, iLife, the digital hub et al. are great in the consumer sector, but...
a recent article in the Wall Str Journal (OMG) highlighted Apple's biggest issue as a company throughout its history: that while it has often (almost always, in fact) been an industry leader, with pioneering products, developing new applications and markets ? it has had serious trouble KEEPING those markets
AppleMatters had an insightful article some months back on why Apple hopefully won't make the same mistakes with the iPod/iTunes success as it did with the Mac itself ? stagnation & expensive proprietry hardware during the 90's being the main ones ? i think the wave of innovation following his Steveness' return & Apple's come-back are indicative that they won't make the same mistakes...
there have over the last 20 years been many valid reasons to pay "Mac-Tax" on Apple as well as 3rd-party Mac hardware, from cutting-edge applications (DTP in the 80's, DTVideo in the 90's) to sometimes-superior proprietry hardware (eg: 68000 32-bit processor in 1984, introduction of SCSI wayyy back in 1985; NuBus before PCI in the PC world - the best desktop graphics were on Mac back then with Radius cards; PowerPC which was well ahead of x86 from the beginning through the 601, 604, G3 era - only being overtaken when Moto dropped the ball with G4 development - back in the lead with G5 for a while, at least...)
however, with IBM dropping the same ball & the move to Intel - the gloves are off: it really now is about OS X & Apple's awesome software vs. Windows on similar Intel hardware
back to the thread: the independent person/small 2-5 person shop is doing a lot of Pro video & motion graphic work these days. FCS with Motion is a superb solution ? it'll keep a lot of us die-hard fans around for a long time
however, there are plenty of the above users (including many colleagues where i'm based) who are happily using Adobe Video suite on Windoze (Premiere, After Effects & Encore vs. Final Cut Pro, Motion & DVD SPro) - many of the above find Mac + FCS + AFX7 very appealing ? but the value & desktop-life of hardware (expandibility, lack of processor upgradeability, etc.) is the major deterrent
to retain & increase the Pro creative market share (not to mention win back a lot of users who went peecee in the 90's), Apple's got to offer fast, market-competitive Pro boxes with serious motherboards & lots of space for internal drives (ie: like the 9500, 9600, even the G4 el Capitan case)
yes, the higher-end video facility will typically have a group of G5's as workstations (and the budget to swap them out for new machines when there's a significant performance improvement) with an Xserve installation in the background
but the smaller 1-5 person shop (a large and still growing market which Apple has helped develop) will want a couple of kick-ass machines with plenty of expandibility ? ie: the ability to install SATA-based RAID internally and go up to a couple of TB within one machine, not to mention adding a second GPU for SLI/CrossFire - an upgradeable processor would seal this deal for many potential Pro switchers... (and tho the extreme tech-minded will love to tinker with ZIF tools, most of these will be delighted to bring the machine into an Apple store and pay for installation & a generous mark-up on the chip price)
in the higher end of this market (and as these smaller design/video shops grow in time as well) the dual 16x PCIe is essential ? to make the Mac a serious 3D design platform as well, not to mention give Shake the real hardware muscle it needs to not only contend with the likes of Discreet's Edit but start eating into the lower-end of the Flame market...
with SGI currently in the red, there's never been a riper time...
so, Apple - a biiig Pro Box with a *highly* expandible line from 1 x Woodcrest (with a spare socket) through to 2 x fastest available, from $2000 ? $4000, but all with the same case & mobo (6 x 3.5"bays, plenty of RAM & PCIe slots) ? will go down really well in a market that's felt a bit neglected of late... not to mention win (pun shamelessly intended) many more Pro switchers...
and, yes - a 21st century mid-range cube or pizza-box, a Mac midi, with video on one PCIe card and a spare for expansion, a range from $1000 ? $2000 (entry level CPU & GPU to top-of-the-line Conroe & an X1600), would be awesome for the midrange user / student or entry-level video&media user/switcher... (or anyone who can't bring themselves to the idea of a *disposable* 17 or 20" LCD monitor)
Originally posted by sunilraman
[i]Anyway if you wanted 2 7950g2s, it would really only be for gaming PC titles at really high resolutions. Otherwise for Mac Pros you'd just go Quadro. For those seriously into Mac gaming, a single high-end 7series nVidia card would be enough.
*yells* I don't want SLI or Crossfire or dual pci-e cards for gaming!!! *spits on games* hehe.
It's funny, everyone immediately jumps on the gaming bandwagon when sli is brought up. I want it for modeling and real time rendering on those models i'm working with. Why can't anyone see how much more beneficial it is to have this stuff in the studio as opposed to adding 30fps on your games *rolls eyes*.
Originally posted by moloko
and, yes - a 21st century mid-range cube
With Steve apparently never having gotten over his NeXT phase, that would be great. It's obvious that he still loves cubes, what with the newest NYC Apple Store having one as an entrance. And the Macbook has just brought in black as the new, um, black. So why not something that looks almost exactly like the original NeXT Cube, 12" on each side and black? That was so far ahead of its time, with no floppy drive and only one optical drive as removable media, giving it a clean exterior that would mesh well with current Apple models. You can't tell me Apple's engineers couldn't squeeze four HD bays and a couple of PCIe slots into that form factor. Heck, with a little imagination, you could pack six bays in there (say three vertically on edge on each side of the optical bay, with the PCI slots below the optical drive, which could let this thing be as little as 8" tall). Add black anodized versions of the aluminum Cinema Displays, and the Cube system of the 80s would be back!
Originally posted by Kolchak
With Steve apparently never having gotten over his NeXT phase, that would be great.
...no doubt Steve Jobs is fond of distinctive form factors, from the original Mac (skip a few generations of above-average beige boxes in the Sculley to Amelio years - tho NeXT did look awesome for that time
You can't tell me Apple's engineers couldn't squeeze four HD bays and a couple of PCIe slots into that form factor. Heck, with a little imagination, you could pack six bays in there (say three vertically on edge on each side of the optical bay, with the PCI slots below the optical drive, which could let this thing be as little as 8" tall).
...tho the footnotes of Apple history are also full of the conflicts between Steve's ideal concepts and engineering reality... (the RDF has also been known to fuel fans to acts of insanity...
...here, I'm rooting for a genuine Pro Box for Pro's (I dig my giant cheese-grater - goes GR8 with my studio aesthetic - but just wish i could pack it with more protein
(AND a new midrange machine in an ever-cool & compact (but think midi not mini) new case - as ever, a computer for human beings, but with comparable value & shelf-life to the Wintel world...)
Originally posted by moloko
(skip a few generations of above-average beige boxes in the Sculley to Amelio years
Am I the only one who thought that the beige-done-right look of the first PMG3 towers was actually pretty appealing?
David
Originally posted by iMacfan
Am I the only one who thought that the beige-done-right look of the first PMG3 towers was actually pretty appealing?
David
Yah I think you're alone on that one buddy
That design originated with the PowerMac 8600 and 9600, and it was definitely ahead of its time from an accessibility standpoint. The side popped off, the PCI slots were immediately visible, the drives were all there in a tray that flipped up to reveal the rest of the logic board including the RAM slots. The only hassle was threading new ribbon cable if you ever wanted to change the type of a drive inside (IDE, UW-SCSI). I still have an 8600 and although it's beige I think it looks more advanced than the B&W G3 next to it.
Should Steve Jobs or anybody who knows him ever see this here's the reality: I have been a loyal Macintosh owner since 1992, but Apple didn't see a penny from six of my eight Mac purchases.
I will never buy an all-in-one desktop or a completely unexpandable repackaged notebook like the mini. I don't need the mobility of a notebook and honestly don't like working on one. That leaves only the tower, but I'm not a pro user and can't justify the cost. Therefore I buy used towers.
I really want to buy a new Intel based Mac so I can finally get rid of the beige PC next to my G5, but Apple doesn't make a single machine that appeals to me.
So Steve, when you release that pizza box for the bloggers, the gamers, the rich people who want a 750GB HD hooked up to their home theaters, and all the rest of us, make sure there's a real desktop processor, 3.5" HD and two slots for video and other cards. You'll also start a really nice trend of getting me to buy new Macs.