- maury markowitz
- Last Active
I'm writing this as someone who owns a MP2013. It is not a good machine. Note that I did not say "bad machine", I said "not good", and that's a big difference. But Apple is supposed to be the company that delivers "better", and the Mac Pro absolutely isn't "better". Some reasons:
- the lack of USB on the front means you are constantly spinning your machine around, or leaving it pointed cables-forward, which kind of defeats the entire purpose of making the front look clean
- 4 USB simply isn't enough. I am constantly pulling one to make room for USB keys and such. This would be better if the Apple keyboard had a USB3 hub, but it's not.
- although dual-GPUs serve a very real need in the market, there's just as many users who don't need it, and/or would prefer a non-workstation GPU.
- the GPUs are mounted via custom connectors which makes them unreplaceable except in servicing. So unlike the old MP where you could drop in a backup GPU if your main one failed, if that occurs on this machine you're SOL until it's repaired.
- the internal SSD is mounted via a connector on one of those cards, and there's only one port. Upgrading it means trashing the old one, assuming you can afford it in the first place.
- in spite of there being ample internal room for it, there is no conventional slot for a drive. Such a slot would make a fusion drive possible, which is not on this machine.
This machine was so highly focused at a single market that it is not a good solution for someone that's simply looking for a fast machine to use with their existing monitor and peripherals. The changes above would have little to no effect on the machine from the outside, it's not like they were forced to make it inflexible, and it's not like there was a particular size they had to hit to make it fit into a particular hole or something. They made this machine limited for no real reason.
lkrupp said:maury markowitz said:Hmmm. Well I, for one, find most of Apple's recent releases to be seriously "meh". While the ATV and iWatch have some obviously useful use-cases, they're certainly not universally useful devices, and they have definite flaws that make them less than useful in their intended roles (battery life in the watch, lack of live TV and usable in-home streaming for the ATV). So I, for one, am not really looking forward to Apple' take on the clock radio or refrigerator.
The Apple TV is useful only for pre-recorded content. Although it's possible to use it live with various add-ons like the Tablo, these are expensive and limited. Without live streaming for things like news and sports, if you're into that, the usefulness of the product is simply not all it could be. We hear of various efforts to address this, but so far, nothing. Additionally, it's ability to work with your own content is far more limited than it should be. It requires you to leave iTunes running in the background 24/7, and even then it often fails to work for no reason at all. I have a collection of classic movies I'm working my wait through, and it's a serious PITA to do so.
Then there's the Airport. In spite of the hardware inside having the same processor and hardware as other routers, it has many limitations for no reason. For instance, there's a fourth ethernet in there we can't use, and three hidden USB. I have USB printers I'd love to plug into it, but no, I have to use a hub. For all of this, it's slower than any router based on the same platform, in some cases a lot, for no reason. And then there's they way that it has all the files from my Mac, but I still have to run iTunes to share them - why can't it be the iTunes hub and thus let me turn off my main machine? Or the way that it utterly fails as a Windows file share, in spite of claims to the contrary. It's simply not as good a product as it could be with a *little* attention.
And finally, let's move onto my new Mac Pro. I replaced my 2007 vintage Mac Pro with a 2013 model. This is nowhere near as good a machine. It has two GPUs that can only be replaced by sending in the whole machine, in spite of being the part that is the #1 failure point on most high-end workstations. Better yet, they decided to use *two different* non-standard card formats, so not only can you not ever buy a new card for the machine, you can't even swap them out if one fails. And then there's the lack of USB on the front, which means you have to leave your machine turned around all the time, and just the general lack of USB in general, four ports on a workstation? And the lack of even a single internal drive bay, which would trivially fit into the existing case if it was eSATA for a slimline SSD, thus making an all-SSD fusion drive possible. I have to connect an external to do anything, and suffer annoying reboots when the external isn't ready in time for the OS to wake up. Externals are fine for its intended market, but that's just it, it's intended market is this tiny segment of users. For people who just want a good desktop powerhouse machine for development, well, tough, buy an entire iMac every few years.
I realize this will get downvotes for daring to speak negatively, but that's fine. I buy Apple because I demand better, and lately, they simply aren't delivering much better. You should all be holding their feet to the flame too. Don't settle just because it has an Apple logo.
Hmmm. Well I, for one, find most of Apple's recent releases to be seriously "meh". While the ATV and iWatch have some obviously useful use-cases, they're certainly not universally useful devices, and they have definite flaws that make them less than useful in their intended roles (battery life in the watch, lack of live TV and usable in-home streaming for the ATV). So I, for one, am not really looking forward to Apple' take on the clock radio or refrigerator.
AppleInsider said:It's not clear why the endpiece would have to be so big, though one possibility is the presence of an authenticator chip.
Bluetooth audio is an alternative, but its quality is generally weaker and wireless headphones are often more expensive than wired options.
As to the second statement, sorry, that's utterly bogus. BT sound quality is far beyond the quality of the physical mechanism itself - in other words there is no actual advantage to a cable. You can get really nice sounding BT earphones for $20 on Amazon, ones that are seriously competitive with Apple's in-ear headphones, let alone the buds.
The first time I used a BT headset, from Aukey for $18 if you're looking, I immediately asked myself why anyone would live with a cable. I no longer will, and no one else should either. They snag, get statically charged, pull the phones out of your ear, and demand you be beside your phone. That last one might sound like a joke, but now when i work out I leave my phone on the counter and do a complete workout without touching it once.