PDA

View Full Version : Mac Pro To Get Dual Optical Drive Slots?


Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Jul 14, 2006, 02:03 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Apple's forthcoming Mac Pro will sport dual Optical Drive slots, if a recent report from AppleInsider (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1886) pans out. In addition, the power supply is rumored to be moved from the bottom of the enclosure to the top. Otherwise, the enclosure would remain largely unchanged from today's PowerMac G5 design.

ThinkSecret currently believes (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060704122932.shtml) the Mac Pro enclosure change will be a more radical departure from the present design to signify the processor change.

Also mentioned in the article is an independent report of possible specifications for the new machines with the "Best" configuration topping out at two 2.66 Ghz Xeon processors. This anonymous source sent possible specs for the Mac Pro to both MacRumors and Appleinsider, and while the validity of the specs are uncertain, the anonymous specs also independently claimed the new Mac Pro would have two optical drives.

Chaszmyr
Jul 14, 2006, 02:08 PM
This is good news for me.. it will make it easy to resist buying one this year. No 3ghz xeon, no bluray, no new case design.

Eidorian
Jul 14, 2006, 02:09 PM
Dual optical drive slots are a must. I love my Mirrored Drive Door at work for this fact.

BlizzardBomb
Jul 14, 2006, 02:12 PM
2003: "In 12 months, we'll be at 3GHz".
Mid 2006: "I want to talk about 2.66GHz" although 4 cores running at 2.66GHz (Yum! :D ).

camomac
Jul 14, 2006, 02:12 PM
ahhh, why didn't they have dual optical slots in the current G5's..
too much heat from the PPC's and all those fans?

well i am really looking forward to the new look.

vniow
Jul 14, 2006, 02:13 PM
Can anyone tell me the purpose of dual drive slots nowadays? I can see the use for them (and had computers with) when they were limited to one function, i.e. DVD-ROM for one and a CD-RW for the other but now that everything can happen in one drive with speed not being an issue, is it really nececcary to have two?

Eidorian
Jul 14, 2006, 02:15 PM
Can anyone tell me the purpose of dual drive slots nowadays? I can see the use for them (and had computers with) when they were limited to one function, i.e. DVD-ROM for one and a CD-RW for the other but now that everything can happen in one drive with speed not being an issue, is it really nececcary to have two?Burn two DVD's at once and DVD copying.

Chaszmyr
Jul 14, 2006, 02:16 PM
Can anyone tell me the purpose of dual drive slots nowadays? I can see the use for them (and had computers with) when they were limited to one function, i.e. DVD-ROM for one and a CD-RW for the other but now that everything can happen in one drive with speed not being an issue, is it really nececcary to have two?

There used to be some software to directly copy from CD to CDR, and this was very common in the days before people had MP3 players... but I can't imagine many people doing this anymore, and I don't know of any software to do this with DVDs.

It would be nice if you play a game that requires a CD in and won't permit you to use a disc image on the hard drive.

DMann
Jul 14, 2006, 02:16 PM
2003: "In 12 months, we'll be at 3GHz".
Mid 2006: "I want to talk about 2.66GHz" although 4 cores running at 2.66GHz (Yum! :D ).

Now, that is FUNNY!

However, based on availability, Apple could get up to 3GHz if they
really wanted to:

Dual Core Intel® Xeon™ Processors 5160 (4MB L2 Cache, 3 GHz 1333MHz FSB)

Perhaps "one more thing......"

milozauckerman
Jul 14, 2006, 02:20 PM
I got excited for a second - hey a $1799 low end quad, I'm sold! Oh, wait, just one processor, never mind.

Too expensive on the low-end, if true. I suspect we'll see a lot of reviews and benchmarks giving a bad cost to value ratio for the Macs.

4God
Jul 14, 2006, 02:27 PM
Power supply at the top? Blah! :mad: I hate the power supply on the top, not that
it would keep me from purchasing a new MacPro though. ;)

nagromme
Jul 14, 2006, 02:28 PM
A new case would be "fun" but what I care about is what it delivers, not how it looks when I crawl under my desk :)

For the low-end (single chip) towers, dual core Conroe makes more sense to me than Xeon, simply for cost reasons. (Though I'm eyeing the new Xeons for my first ever top-end Mac... with dual-duals!)

Two optical slots would be nice, allowing me to "wait and see" about next-gen optical formats.

My intention: to wait for 3Ghz+ Xeon, which sounds like it should only be a few months later. That's also time for a few little tweaks to be made if necessary, giving me something between a version A and version B machine.


I suspect we'll see a lot of reviews and benchmarks giving a bad cost to value ratio for the Macs.
Without a doubt. And in keeping with long tradition, the "less expensive" name-brand PC will mysteriously come with less (ports, software, even speed if Netburst lingers) than the Mac :)

4God
Jul 14, 2006, 02:29 PM
....<snip>....My intention: to wait for 3Ghz+ Xeon, which sounds like it should only be a few months later. That's also time for a few little tweaks to be made if necessary, giving me something between a version A and version B machine.


Yeah, and I would hope for a faster FSB as well.

~Shard~
Jul 14, 2006, 02:30 PM
If true, these definitely would be powerful machines, however for people like myself, the power and resulting price tag will be simply too much to justify. Leave the Xeons for the PowerMacs, but introduce some mini-tower machines with Conroe chips - they would fit nicely between the iMac and PowerMac. For me, the Mac mini isn't enough, the iMac is great, however non-upgradeable. I'd like something upgradeable, where I could replace/upgrade HDDs, optical drives, and most importantly the display - yet a PowerMac is overkill for my needs. It sure would be nice to see, but I doubt Apple will do it... :cool:

4God
Jul 14, 2006, 02:30 PM
Dual optical drive slots are a must....<snip>.....

Maybe one of the drives will be Blu-Ray.

~Shard~
Jul 14, 2006, 02:32 PM
My intention: to wait for 3Ghz+ Xeon, which sounds like it should only be a few months later. That's also time for a few little tweaks to be made if necessary, giving me something between a version A and version B machine.

That's a really good plan. Wait a few months, let the bugs get ironed out of the new Intel PowerMacs, and then buy something for the same price with better technology.

QCassidy352
Jul 14, 2006, 02:32 PM
intersting that the price differences are quite large. I was also hoping for an all-quad line up and a case redesign. I've never liked the look of the G5.

Arn/powers that be - can you tell us whether or not you consider this source to be reliable? Have you ever heard from them in the past?

4God
Jul 14, 2006, 02:32 PM
If true, these definitely would be powerful machines, however for people like myself, the power and resulting price tag will be simply too much to justify. Leave the Xeons for the PowerMacs, but introduce some mini-tower machines with Conroe chips - they would fit nicely between the iMac and PowerMac. For me, the Mac mini isn't enough, the iMac is great, however non-upgradeable. I'd like something upgradeable, where I could replace/upgrade HDDs, optical drives, and most importantly the display - yet a PowerMac is overkill for my needs. It sure would be nice to see, but I doubt Apple will do it... :cool:


Well said, I agree with you. Apple, IMHO, needs an "inbetween" machine for upgradablity. This would shorten the gap between consmumer and prosumer.

~Shard~
Jul 14, 2006, 02:33 PM
Maybe one of the drives will be Blu-Ray.

... and the other one HD-DVD! :eek: ;) :D

OhEsTen
Jul 14, 2006, 02:34 PM
I figured Apple didn't change the cases for the powerbooks (MBP) MacBook's and mini's and iMac's for a reason...

It reminds people that nothing has really changed about them other than their brains (which is a big deal for sure - it just keep people from thinking Apple's going out of business...)

I remember when Apple made their announcement a year ago about the Intel switch - Macworld running an article about "what it all means" and "is this death for Apple?" - some people were a bit freaked out (which was completely understandable from the netburst point of view) - but keeping the same enclosures for the first round of intel boxes helps people not freak out.... maybe.

gregarious119
Jul 14, 2006, 02:34 PM
To charge $1800 for a system that only has 512MB is a real disappoitment. 1GB RAM oughta be standard, especially with Leopard being on the horizon.

Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.

sisyphus
Jul 14, 2006, 02:34 PM
That's nice...

They'd better have something in between this and the iMac...

4God
Jul 14, 2006, 02:35 PM
... and the other one HD-DVD! :eek: ;) :D

Doh! Well, again IMHO, it is my preference to have only one optical drive built in. I could always add an external later.

avkills
Jul 14, 2006, 02:35 PM
Man if they put the power supply on the top that would just be insanely stupid. 2 Optical drives is fine by me, although I am good with just one. But the post above about a Blu-Ray drive would make having 2 logical, one is Blue-ray, other is DVD/CD +/- RW.

-mark

Eraserhead
Jul 14, 2006, 02:35 PM
As usual though they come with 50% of the necessary RAM :rolleyes:, why Apple can't get this right I don't know.

Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?

Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...

poppe
Jul 14, 2006, 02:37 PM
Maybe one of the drives will be Blu-Ray.

Appleinsider is saying that it can be used for both at your choice, but you have to go buy it and put it in. Not a add on to ordering.

So excited... How come no FW800 infront? thats a little crazy no?

Just think if this was apple leaking out information when really its a completely different design. Since they're was that leaking lawsuit and all. Wouldn't it be great if the figured out the sources leaking internaly and made those sources give Appleinsider false information.

Come August 7th, It's completely different... (oh just woke up from my dream.)

~Shard~
Jul 14, 2006, 02:37 PM
To charge $1800 for a system that only has 512MB is a real disappoitment. 1GB RAM oughta be standard, especially with Leopard being on the horizon.

Agreed. I can make an argument for the consumer machines, where perhaps 512 MB is sufficient for basic users. Specifically, why force them to pay more for 1 GB if they don't need it. But when it comes to the Pro machines, as if anyone buying one of these beasts is not going to require at least 2 GB of RAM, let alone 1 GB. No one buys a quad Xeon Powermac to just surf the Internet and check their e-mail. :cool:

QCassidy352
Jul 14, 2006, 02:38 PM
I'd like something upgradeable, where I could replace/upgrade HDDs, optical drives, and most importantly the display - yet a PowerMac is overkill for my needs. It sure would be nice to see, but I doubt Apple will do it... :cool:

I doubt they'll do it too. For some reason this idea has come up over and over again during the last few weeks, and I'll continue to say what I've been saying - I don't see why apple would do that. It's a very appealing idea for a lot of MR folks because a lot of us are knowledgable users but not really professionals. But beyond that group, which is prevalent at MR but fairly rare in the real world, I don't see the appeal.

Also, think about what apple would be doing with such a machine - selling you a low cost, low margin mac that you could nonetheless upgrade with 3rd party components for years. Meaning that apple doesn't make a lot off you up front and doesn't get you coming back again for 5-ish years. Great for you, not so great for them. Whereas if they sell you a mac pro, they make a killing up front, so it's ok if you keep it for years, and if they sell you anything else you'll be back a lot sooner.

poppe
Jul 14, 2006, 02:39 PM
As usual though they come with 50% of the necessary RAM :rolleyes:, why Apple can't get this right I don't know.

Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?

Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...


You would think they would come out with the fastest chip...

I mean what seperates them from a Dell or HP workstation that is top of the line? OS X (yes), but to the ones on the fence that doesn't justify paying more for less.

Dont Hurt Me
Jul 14, 2006, 02:40 PM
I hope this is just smoke and mirrors for a brand new enclosure that brings back some coolness,style, and great looks. There shouldnt be any reason a new pro Mac cant hold more then 1 optical drive? My 2 yr old Aurora can hold 4. The G5 Powermacs didnt use space very well if you ask me, Im sure Jobs will have a all new enclosure otherwise it will be a ho humm WWDC.

poppe
Jul 14, 2006, 02:40 PM
I doubt they'll do it too. For some reason this idea has come up over and over again during the last few weeks, and I'll continue to say what I've been saying - I don't see why apple would do that. It's a very appealing idea for a lot of MR folks because a lot of us are knowledgable users but not really professionals. But beyond that group, which is prevalent at MR but fairly rare in the real world, I don't see the appeal.

Also, think about what apple would be doing with such a machine - selling you a low cost, low margin mac that you could nonetheless upgrade with 3rd party components for years. Meaning that apple doesn't make a lot off you up front and doesn't get you coming back again for 5-ish years. Great for you, not so great for them. Whereas if they sell you a mac pro, they make a killing up front, so it's ok if you keep it for years, and if they sell you anything else you'll be back a lot sooner.

Dont ruin it!!! :p

~Shard~
Jul 14, 2006, 02:40 PM
They'd better have something in between this and the iMac...

Did you see my above post? Great minds think a like... ;)

adamfilip
Jul 14, 2006, 02:42 PM
more importantly then dual optical is being able to support 4 hard drives then!

~Shard~
Jul 14, 2006, 02:42 PM
Appleinsider is saying that it can be used for both at your choice, but you have to go buy it and put it in. Not a add on to ordering.

Odd, you think Apple would at least give you the option at the online Store, just as they do with 2 displays... But, perhaps one optival drive will indeed come standard, and the other will be available for whatever the person wants.

Or perhaps there will not be 2 optical drives to begin with. :o ;) :cool:

poppe
Jul 14, 2006, 02:43 PM
Kind of a week video card isn't it? I dont know much about Vcards... but feels week. Perhaps its real nice though

Gasu E.
Jul 14, 2006, 02:43 PM
Did you see my above post? Great minds think a like... ;)


Logically speaking, weak minds would also think "a like".

~Shard~
Jul 14, 2006, 02:45 PM
Also, think about what apple would be doing with such a machine - selling you a low cost, low margin mac that you could nonetheless upgrade with 3rd party components for years. Meaning that apple doesn't make a lot off you up front and doesn't get you coming back again for 5-ish years. Great for you, not so great for them. Whereas if they sell you a mac pro, they make a killing up front, so it's ok if you keep it for years, and if they sell you anything else you'll be back a lot sooner.

Yep - and that's the reality of it. It isn't just about the consumer, it's about profit margins, product life cycles, sales, etc. Apple wants to please their customers of course, however at the end of the day, business is business. :cool:

Foxglove9
Jul 14, 2006, 02:52 PM
If those specs are real then I'm glad I didn't hold out for the Mac Pro and bought a used G5 a few months ago. Dual optical drive slots are nice but for me not necessary.

Doctor Q
Jul 14, 2006, 02:54 PM
... and the other one HD-DVD! :eek: ;) :DWhy all the smilies? Having the ability to install other-format optical drives is what AppleInsider is talking about.

Tom B.
Jul 14, 2006, 02:54 PM
These look really cool, but I hope Apple have at least 1GB of RAM on these as standard, even on the cheapest model as this is supposed to be their most powerful computer. Actually they should have 1GB RAM as standard on all of their computers.

milozauckerman
Jul 14, 2006, 02:54 PM
Without a doubt. And in keeping with long tradition, the "less expensive" name-brand PC will mysteriously come with less (ports, software, even speed if Netburst lingers) than the Mac
I'm talking about Core2 Duo machines - either Conroe or Woodcrest.

Ports? My G5 tower had no more ports than any other PC I've seen. My current CD iMac actually lacks any kind of high-speed port for external hard-drives or burners.

Software? OK, I know it's supposed to be a selling point, but there's not a damn thing outside of iTunes I use in iLife enough to justify hardware prices at any level. They're nice freebies, but I happily pay the Apple Tax to have an OS that works with me rather than against me. Unquestionably worth it, but I'm not going to pretend that I'm getting good value in the (theoretical) hardware.

I think I know what the apologists will say - no one else will offer Woodcrest in a low-end pro machine, they'll use Conroe. And yeah, that's probably true, but for a reason - there's no reason to put Woodcrest in the low-end tower offering, aside from a desire to perpetuate the artifical line distinctions. Which isn't going to cut it in the Intel world.

dornoforpyros
Jul 14, 2006, 02:57 PM
eh I'm willing to bet they stick with the g5 type case, I mean the macbook is the only "new" case we've seen with the intel transition.

~Shard~
Jul 14, 2006, 02:57 PM
Kind of a week video card isn't it? I dont know much about Vcards... but feels week. Perhaps its real nice though

What would you prefer, a day video card, or perhaps a month video card? :p :D

Logically speaking, weak minds would also think "a like".

Actually, it's technically "fools seldom differ", but I just like to ignore that part of the saying... ;) :cool:

If Apple is going to be including dual optical drives, you think it would only make sense for them to include more HDD drive bays as well, which to me would be just as (if not more) important and useful. But, perhaps they will not be able to with the added optical drive. Guess it comes down to how much they redesign the case.

milo
Jul 14, 2006, 02:58 PM
Can anyone tell me the purpose of dual drive slots nowadays? I can see the use for them (and had computers with) when they were limited to one function, i.e. DVD-ROM for one and a CD-RW for the other but now that everything can happen in one drive with speed not being an issue, is it really nececcary to have two?

Same purpose. DVD-ROM in one, bluray or HD-DVD in the other. Plus two are nice for duping.

Too expensive on the low-end, if true. I suspect we'll see a lot of reviews and benchmarks giving a bad cost to value ratio for the Macs.

You obviously haven't shopped around. Price out machines with these CPU's at Dell, you're looking at $2400/2600/3700. I think these prices are too *low* based on chip prices and current PC prices. I think that whole grid is bogus.

As for the 3G chip, it could be a BTO option. I assume other video cards would be BTO options as well.

~Shard~
Jul 14, 2006, 03:00 PM
Why all the smilies? Having the ability to install other-format optical drives is what AppleInsider is talking about.

I was directing the smilies more towards 4God, since he only mentioned Blu-Ray as if it would be a given that would be the only type of drive Apple would be including. ;)

There, see, you only get one smilie. :D Okay, two, including that one...

crees!
Jul 14, 2006, 03:01 PM
Could ThinkSecret's "radical design" posting have been geared toward the rumor of a compact motherboard which is now suspected to be more "normal" in dimensions?

vgermax
Jul 14, 2006, 03:02 PM
It would be unlikely that Apple wouldn't utilize the highest clocked Xeons available. Also, quad configurations should be present in more than just the top-end unit as that is one of the main advantages of going with the Woodcrest versus Conroe, that and a higher default FSB.

The video card configurations are also previous generation. I don't know for certain, but it seems the PCIe configuration isn't consistent with the information available on the i5000X. The standard Intel design is 1 x16, 2 x4 (with x8 slots) for a total of 24 lanes, not 16 or 32 as might be interpreted from the "spec" sheet.

It might also be reasonable to expect an optional RAID configuration as a RAID controller is built-in to the southbridge.

59031
Jul 14, 2006, 03:04 PM
Power Supply at the top is REALLY stupid.

milo
Jul 14, 2006, 03:04 PM
Power Supply at the top is REALLY stupid.

Why?

jwsmiths
Jul 14, 2006, 03:05 PM
For the low-end (single chip) towers, dual core Conroe makes more sense to me than Xeon, simply for cost reasons. (Though I'm eyeing the new Xeons for my first ever top-end Mac... with dual-duals!)
Except Conroes don't support dual processor configuration. Woodcrest does, hence the reason it will be in the Pro line machines while Conroe is put into new iMacs.

~Shard~
Jul 14, 2006, 03:05 PM
Power Supply at the top is REALLY stupid.

I've never thought much of the relevance of its placement myself - why do you say that? Care to elaborate on why it is "REALLY stupid"?

nagromme
Jul 14, 2006, 03:07 PM
Leave the Xeons for the PowerMacs, but introduce some mini-tower machines with Conroe chips - they would fit nicely between the iMac and PowerMac.
Yes--whatever the name, whatever the case size, a low-to-midrange tower is needed to fill a gap in the lineup.

It could even just be a lower-spec'd Mac Pro than the ones posted in this article. Just something that allows a choice of display--and GPU--for non high-end buyers.

I think it's only a matter of time before this gap (and the "small MacBook Pro" gap) are filled. After all, Apple did fill the bottom-end headless gap (Mac Mini) which once seemed impossible!

Doctor Q
Jul 14, 2006, 03:07 PM
Power Supply at the top is REALLY stupid.Why? What are the advantages/disadvantages to having it higher or lower in the case? Does the weight distribution matter?

wmmk
Jul 14, 2006, 03:09 PM
... and the other one HD-DVD! :eek: ;) :D
:dools: whoa, that'd be lovely. would they both also accept normal DVDs and CDs?

guzhogi
Jul 14, 2006, 03:11 PM
I kinda wish Apple used regular ATX cases & power supplies, or at least have the external drive bays be ATX style. While I like Apple style, I'd also like to add multiple CD/DVD drives to my system without having to get external drives to clutter my desk. I am trying to write a program like iTunes that lets me rip multiple CDs (or tracks if only 1 cd) at once. Also, some external 3.5" bays would be nice so I could add a memory card reader or a Soundblaster X-Fi Fatal1ty if there were Mac drivers for it. More internal drive bays would be nice for those who want to have a RAID setup.

hyperpasta
Jul 14, 2006, 03:11 PM
I have to say that the enclosure news was expected. However, I would really hope that Apple can pull off better specs than that...

peharri
Jul 14, 2006, 03:11 PM
Some of this makes sense, some of it not.

I think AppleInsider is right about the case. With the exception of the MacBook, whose design has been rumoured for years and clearly was something Apple would have done even had this been the "iBook G5", Apple has made it a point with all of their Intelizations to use the same case as the predecessor, as if to say "It's business as usual, all we've changed is the processor." So from that point of view, the PowerMac G5 case being, more or less, the Mac Pro case, makes a lot of sense.

Two optical drives? No, sorry, not seeing the reasoning. The reasons given so far don't add up:

- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.

Against this, you have the confusion generated by a Mac with two optical drives. I have a Mac with two optical drives (an in-built combo drive, and a FW DVD burner), and it's not terribly elegant. It's fine when reading disks (obviously), but writing them generates some confusion. How sure am I that I'm burning to the right drive? I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying this would be unbelievably un-Mac like. It'd be like the next version of iTunes coming with a menu at the top of its window.

It's also kind of easy to see where this rumour might have originated, in some garbled communication where the rumourmonger says "Two optical drive formats", or "Two bays", or "Multiple media readers" (hey, why not put an SD/CF/MS reader on the front? Pretty much everyone uses them these days, especially the prosumer-market Apple is after. Bet there are more people who'd use an SD card reader than a Firewire port.)

I've been wrong before, but I'm going to go for a traditional PowerMac G5 enclosure, and a single optical drive which may, or may not, support Blu-ray in some shape or form.

nagromme
Jul 14, 2006, 03:11 PM
Except Conroes don't support dual processor configuration. Woodcrest does, hence the reason it will be in the Pro line machines while Conroe is put into new iMacs.
Right, but I didn't say dual processors, I said dual cores.

I see no reason why ALL Pro machines need quad cores, when today's dual core G5s are FAR slower than that and still blaze through a lot of useful work! An all-quad pro lineup would be "cool" (and I seek a quad anyway, personally) but would simply add cost without justification, for many people.

In addition, if the new chips are supply-constrained at all having both Conroe and Woodcrest in the pro towers could help. (And the iMac does fine with Yonah for a while if need be--which seems likely to happen to me.)

bigmc6000
Jul 14, 2006, 03:14 PM
Why? What are the advantages/disadvantages to having it higher or lower in the case? Does the weight distribution matter?


Weight is one - ever try picking up something that's top heavy? It's rather awkward to carry/pickup and makes it much more likely to tip. Another reason being the cord would likely be hanging down from said spot - while this seems ok it's really not good for the wires inside - ideally it would only have sweeping curves in the line as opposed to what happens with havinga plug so high. I'm conflicted about the heat issue as there are pro's and con's to both configs so I'll stick with awkward weight distribution as the key limiting factor.

bigmc6000
Jul 14, 2006, 03:17 PM
Some of this makes sense, some of it not.

I think AppleInsider is right about the case. With the exception of the MacBook, whose design has been rumoured for years and clearly was something Apple would have done even had this been the "iBook G5", Apple has made it a point with all of their Intelizations to use the same case as the predecessor, as if to say "It's business as usual, all we've changed is the processor." So from that point of view, the PowerMac G5 case being, more or less, the Mac Pro case, makes a lot of sense.

Two optical drives? No, sorry, not seeing the reasoning. The reasons given so far don't add up:

- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.



As per ownership rights listed by the US copyright office you're allowed to make backup copies of all personally owned material. Now DVD makers would like to make that impossible as it supports the subsequent illegal activity however, strictly legal speaking there is absolutely nothing illegal about making a copy of your DVD's (selling/distributing is where you cross the legal/illegal line)

KindredMAC
Jul 14, 2006, 03:20 PM
A new Mac Pro for $1799? Not bad people!!!! In essence Apple is cutting the price of the current Dual Core 2 GHz G5 PowerMac by $200..... The same price as it is on the EDU store.

If you want something cheaper, buy an iMac for Christ's sake! That's why Apple has made them as powerful as they are now. They are meant as a bridge between the "Con-sumer" and the "Pro-sumer". PowerMacs have been and always will be for PROFESSIONALS!!!! Not the weekend warrior who "dabbles" in Photoshop. That's what the iMac is for people!!!

In my opinion and thoughts there will be no difference between these and the current G5 PowerMacs in performance.

As for Dual Optical Drives? AMEN! It is a hassle and waste of HD space when you need to copy a disc, especially Application Discs that you might want to keep in a safe place but have a copy always handy. I'm contemplating buying an external DVD Burner to hook up to my Dual Core G5 PM for these very reasons. I might wait though for a Blu Ray Disc Burner first though.

The thing that perplexes me is the relocation of the Power Supply to the top. This is either bogus info or they know something they aren't letting on about all the Liquid Cooling problems that have been arising lately in the repair world.
Plus would this not put a strain on the power cord since the cord would have its own weight hanging down on it instead of how it currently comes out of the back of the tower and immediately lays on the floor or desk surface? Something's fishy about this.

milo
Jul 14, 2006, 03:21 PM
Except Conroes don't support dual processor configuration. Woodcrest does, hence the reason it will be in the Pro line machines while Conroe is put into new iMacs.

So why use woodcrest WITHOUT dual processor configuration? Makes no sense, any single proc models should be conroe.

- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.

Against this, you have the confusion generated by a Mac with two optical drives. I have a Mac with two optical drives (an in-built combo drive, and a FW DVD burner), and it's not terribly elegant. It's fine when reading disks (obviously), but writing them generates some confusion. How sure am I that I'm burning to the right drive? I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying this would be unbelievably un-Mac like. It'd be like the next version of iTunes coming with a menu at the top of its window.


Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.

Copying DVD's, nowadays people are backing up their own materials. Most dvd copying would be making backups of your own discs. Burning multiple discs would be a great option as well. And bluray drives will be INCREDIBLY expensive when these machines ship, not to mention who knows how well they will burn cd's and dvd's (assuming that all bluray drives will be burners, none of them readers only). Many people will want to wait and add a bluray or hd-dvd later, especially since nobody knows which will be the winning format.

milo
Jul 14, 2006, 03:22 PM
A new Mac Pro for $1799? Not bad people!!!! In essence Apple is cutting the price of the current Dual Core 2 GHz G5 PowerMac by $200..... The same price as it is on the EDU store.

Amen to that. Especially when you look at the dell site and see that their tower with that same CPU costs about $2400.

Mtn Tamale
Jul 14, 2006, 03:27 PM
If they use single woodcrest CPU's instead of Conroe in the lower end, it isn't because marketing is driving the decision, it would likely be manufacturing and operations, probably a volume/pricing decision. If the most popular Powermacs are low and high end, which I believe is true, then there is benefit to making all Woodcrest. If Apple only populated the scantily sold highest end model with Woodcrest chips they would likely have to sell them for too much.


I'm talking about Core2 Duo machines - either Conroe or Woodcrest.

Ports? My G5 tower had no more ports than any other PC I've seen. My current CD iMac actually lacks any kind of high-speed port for external hard-drives or burners.

Software? OK, I know it's supposed to be a selling point, but there's not a damn thing outside of iTunes I use in iLife enough to justify hardware prices at any level. They're nice freebies, but I happily pay the Apple Tax to have an OS that works with me rather than against me. Unquestionably worth it, but I'm not going to pretend that I'm getting good value in the (theoretical) hardware.

I think I know what the apologists will say - no one else will offer Woodcrest in a low-end pro machine, they'll use Conroe. And yeah, that's probably true, but for a reason - there's no reason to put Woodcrest in the low-end tower offering, aside from a desire to perpetuate the artifical line distinctions. Which isn't going to cut it in the Intel world.

KEL9000
Jul 14, 2006, 03:29 PM
Since apple is part of the Blu Ray consortium wouldn't you think they will use blu ray only?

supremedesigner
Jul 14, 2006, 03:29 PM
Burn two DVD's at once and DVD copying.

I have Mirror Door. How can I burn DVD (top) and CD (bottom) at once via Toast? I have tried and nothing worked, Toast only focus 1 thing at a time. Or am I wrong? :confused:

wmmk
Jul 14, 2006, 03:30 PM
You would think they would come out with the fastest chip...

I mean what seperates them from a Dell or HP workstation that is top of the line? OS X (yes), but to the ones on the fence that doesn't justify paying more for less.
A 2.66 Ghz Woodcrest will probably be faster than a 2.93Ghz Conroe. A 1.83Ghz Yonah is faster than a 3.2Ghz Pentium, right?;)

Glen Quagmire
Jul 14, 2006, 03:31 PM
Why? What are the advantages/disadvantages to having it higher or lower in the case? Does the weight distribution matter?

My PC (in a full tower case) has the PSU at the bottom. Having had a case with the PSU at the top before, it seems more stable with all that weight in the base of the case. It also makes it easier to reach around the back for cables, as I don't need to stretch as far.

I would hope that Apple change the case design a bit more than this. I'm not a huge fan of the cheese grater design. However, it wouldn't prevent me putting in an order for the 2.67Ghz model (exactly when is another matter). It would be nice to have a couple more drive bays and USB ports as well.

The X1800 graphics card appears (from a brief look at the review sites) to be a mid-range card. Hopefully Apple will offer a high-range card (GF7900, X1900) as an option.

supremedesigner
Jul 14, 2006, 03:31 PM
A new Mac Pro for $1799? Not bad people!!!! In essence Apple is cutting the price of the current Dual Core 2 GHz G5 PowerMac by $200..... The same price as it is on the EDU store.

If you want something cheaper, buy an iMac for Christ's sake! That's why Apple has made them as powerful as they are now. They are meant as a bridge between the "Con-sumer" and the "Pro-sumer". PowerMacs have been and always will be for PROFESSIONALS!!!! Not the weekend warrior who "dabbles" in Photoshop. That's what the iMac is for people!!!

In my opinion and thoughts there will be no difference between these and the current G5 PowerMacs in performance.

As for Dual Optical Drives? AMEN! It is a hassle and waste of HD space when you need to copy a disc, especially Application Discs that you might want to keep in a safe place but have a copy always handy. I'm contemplating buying an external DVD Burner to hook up to my Dual Core G5 PM for these very reasons. I might wait though for a Blu Ray Disc Burner first though.

The thing that perplexes me is the relocation of the Power Supply to the top. This is either bogus info or they know something they aren't letting on about all the Liquid Cooling problems that have been arising lately in the repair world.
Plus would this not put a strain on the power cord since the cord would have its own weight hanging down on it instead of how it currently comes out of the back of the tower and immediately lays on the floor or desk surface? Something's fishy about this.

LOL! It hadn't come out yet and people are still complainin'? That cracked me up :)

BWhaler
Jul 14, 2006, 03:33 PM
I've never thought much of the relevance of its placement myself - why do you say that? Care to elaborate on why it is "REALLY stupid"?

1. Notice the power plug hole at the top? Now imagine a cord running out of it. Yup, there is a reason why Apple has put it at the bottom.

2. Top heavy.

BWhaler
Jul 14, 2006, 03:35 PM
Since apple is part of the Blu Ray consortium wouldn't you think they will use blu ray only?

Not a chance in the near future. Blu Ray and Sony are in utter shambles right now.

peharri
Jul 14, 2006, 03:36 PM
I think most of your proposed reasons aren't really as practical or useful as people think in practice (that is, most people would never do it, or otherwise gain an advantage); however:

And bluray drives will be INCREDIBLY expensive when these machines ship, not to mention who knows how well they will burn cd's and dvd's (assuming that all bluray drives will be burners, none of them readers only). Many people will want to wait and add a bluray or hd-dvd later, especially since nobody knows which will be the winning format.

This one I can believe. Room for a future HD optical disk format reader. Makes sense. I was envisaging the Mac Pro coming with two drives, but it makes sense it would come with one and have a slot for a new one for a later date. I suspect a standalone BR or HDDVD drive would cost less than one that also has to replace the functionality of a Superdrive.

If this is Apple's reasoning, it also suggests they're being more pragmatic than analysts keep suggesting on the whole DVDng war. Which makes sense. I have a gut feeling that HDDVD and Bluray are to DVD what SACD and DVD-Audio are to CDs.

mmmcheese
Jul 14, 2006, 03:37 PM
As usual though they come with 50% of the necessary RAM :rolleyes:, why Apple can't get this right I don't know.

Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?

Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...


1) This is all rumour and speculation...
2) At the price that OEMs charge for memory, less RAM is better. We can fill it with whatever we pick.

guzhogi
Jul 14, 2006, 03:37 PM
I have Mirror Door. How can I burn DVD (top) and CD (bottom) at once via Toast? I have tried and nothing worked, Toast only focus 1 thing at a time. Or am I wrong? :confused:

Make a copy of Toast and use one copy for one drive and the other copy for the other drive.

Object-X
Jul 14, 2006, 03:37 PM
What about SLI video card support? They should try and appeal to high end gamers by having a configuration comparable to Alienware or Dell's XPS. If Apple's hardware can now run Windows, Apple should really take a stab at this market. It will be hard to justify $3000 for a computer that doesn't have the latest cutting edge hardware. Dual 512MB nVidia GeForce 7900 GTX would be a nice start. Otherwise, the accusation of overpriced computers will be appropriate. Why would someone running Windows consider this purchase, if they can get better components for less money elsewhere. Is Apple really serious about taking market share away from PC companies? Or are they going to play it safe and target only the market that they already have?

supremedesigner
Jul 14, 2006, 03:39 PM
Make a copy of Toast and use one copy for one drive and the other copy for the other drive.

Ohhhh! That could work. Have anyone tried this before? Thanks! I'll check on it when I get home! :D

BlizzardBomb
Jul 14, 2006, 03:40 PM
512MB RAM on low-end and an X1800 Pro on high-end. I must admit, I'm a little disappointed if this is true.

EDIT: MacRumors lists as X1800 Pro, AppleInsider says X1800 GTO.

heisetax
Jul 14, 2006, 03:43 PM
This is good news for me.. it will make it easy to resist buying one this year. No 3ghz xeon, no bluray, no new case design.


This means that the 2.7 GHz G5 of a year ago or more would still be a high for CPU speeds for the PowerMac/MacPro line. We already have dual dual 2.5 GHz G5 a year ago. An increase to 2.66 GHz means that either 2008 or 2009 we will see the promised 3 GHz PowerMac/MacPro.

Any bets on which year it will be?

Bill the TaxMan

bigandy
Jul 14, 2006, 03:52 PM
the size and weight of the power supply makes it damn stupid to put in the top.

top heavy is just idiotic.

i'd love to see dual optical drive bays and the same basic design as the G5. it's a great design, so why the need for change in the first place... :rolleyes:

Stridder44
Jul 14, 2006, 03:52 PM
1) This is all rumour and speculation...
2) At the price that OEMs charge for memory, less RAM is better. We can fill it with whatever we pick.


I used to side with the people complaining about not having enough standard RAM but not after reading that. You get a gold star.

dpMacsmith
Jul 14, 2006, 03:54 PM
Amen to that. Especially when you look at the dell site and see that their tower with that same CPU costs about $2400.

This makes a nice discussion piece. But, I don't think that Apple will undercut the Dell price. My personal opinion is that the configurations are about right. But, the prices are too low. The table is bogus.

AidenShaw
Jul 14, 2006, 03:54 PM
Now, that is FUNNY!

However, based on availability, Apple could get up to 3GHz if they
really wanted to:

Dual Core Intel® Xeon™ Processors 5160 (4MB L2 Cache, 3 GHz 1333MHz FSB)

Perhaps "one more thing......"
Seven day delivery (which is standard) for dual 3.0 GHz Woodies.

Availability is not a big problem.

shamino
Jul 14, 2006, 03:55 PM
So why use woodcrest WITHOUT dual processor configuration? Makes no sense, any single proc models should be conroe.
4M of L2 cache is another good reason. According to recent reports, only the "extreme edition" of the Core 2 (aka Conroe) chip will have 4M. And it will cost more than Woodcrest.
Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.
Where have you been shopping recently? Only one model PowerMac has ever had two optical drive bay.

The MDD G4 PowerMac towers (August 2002-June 2004) have two optical drive bays. The G4 PowerMacs that came before only have one (the lower bay is only big enough for floppy-size devices, like zip drives.) The G5 PowerMacs only have one externally-accessible bay of any size.

I would love the ability to install two optical drives, but your claim that Apple is currently shipping this somewhere is simply not true.

4God
Jul 14, 2006, 03:56 PM
This means that the 2.7 GHz G5 of a year ago or more would still be a high for CPU speeds for the PowerMac/MacPro line. We already have dual dual 2.5 GHz G5 a year ago. An increase to 2.66 GHz means that either 2008 or 2009 we will see the promised 3 GHz PowerMac/MacPro.

Any bets on which year it will be?

Bill the TaxMan

I think we'll see more cores per cpu before we see 3GHz. IMHO, 4,8 or more cores at 2.66 is far better than 1 or 2 cores at 3GHz.

Sweetfeld28
Jul 14, 2006, 03:56 PM
i always thought it would make more sense to have the power source at the bottom, yes it would help to lower the center of gravity, but would also help desipate the heat generated from it as well. Once the heat would raise from it, the fans in the middle would help to pull it out quickly, unlike if it was at the top and have all the heat from it rise to the top.

Correct me if i am wrong, as i do not own a G5. But, in my MDD G4 my power supply is at the top, and do notice that my big fan in the middle does tend to run at higher speeds in these hotter summer months.

ryan

~Shard~
Jul 14, 2006, 03:57 PM
Since apple is part of the Blu Ray consortium wouldn't you think they will use blu ray only?

No, actually. Apple technically supports HD-DVD as well, since are a member of the DVD Forum, which backs HD-DVD. :cool:

RichP
Jul 14, 2006, 03:59 PM
Ha, when I posted a while back that using Dell as a guide, Xeon processors were feasible, I was ignored, now it seems totally reasonable...

Anyway, I dont see why people make sure comparisons to Windows machines now that we are running Intel hardware. Apple is not building Windows machines, they are building Apple machines that run OSX. Benchmarks will be made, and at times Apple isnt going to win them. But its the OSX experience, and its stability as a platform, that is going to be a selling point, not the all out speed of the top-of-the-top Intel processor (the highest end PC processors always carry a heavy premium; its difficult to say that the yield of what we are shown as the highest available G5 is similar to the yields intel has for their high end)

I just have my fingers crossed that we see some cool "fast-OS switching" in Leopard with these machines.

shamino
Jul 14, 2006, 03:59 PM
My PC (in a full tower case) has the PSU at the bottom. Having had a case with the PSU at the top before, it seems more stable with all that weight in the base of the case. It also makes it easier to reach around the back for cables, as I don't need to stretch as far.
As long as you don't have liquid cooling (a-la the quad G5 systems.)

If your radiator springs a leak, the liquid runs into your power supply, blowing it out (and usually taking out the motherboard as well.)

With the PS on top, this doesn't happen. A leaky radiator simply means a liquid mess in the case (and a system that hits thermal-shutdown very quickly until you get it fixed, of course.)

guzhogi
Jul 14, 2006, 04:00 PM
According to Appleinsider, the Mac Pro would have 2 4x and 1 8x PCIe slots. I see two problems with this. (1) All higher-end PC mobos out now have at least 1 16x slot, some have 2 for SLI/Crossfire. Why would Apple shoot itself in the foot like this? The Mac Pro is supposed to be a lot better than all other PCs. (2) Why only 3 slots? PCs have 6 or so (as did the Power Mac 9500 & 9600) with a few regular PCI slots. Why would Apple shoot itself in the foot like this? The Mac Pro is supposed to be a lot better than all other PCs. It would be nice to have 2 16x lanes for SLI and a few PCI slots for older expansion cards and cards that don't need the bandwidth of PCIe. Besides, this is supposed to be a Pro Mac, which means professional people would want to add a bunch of cards, not just 3. I'd expect a person working in something like movie production would want to have dual graphics cards, a fiber channel card to connect to an xServe RAID and maybe an M-Audio sound card for audio input. Since I don't work in movie production, I wouldn't know, but it would make sense.

shamino
Jul 14, 2006, 04:01 PM
I think we'll see more cores per cpu before we see 3GHz. IMHO, 4,8 or more cores at 2.66 is far better than 1 or 2 cores at 3GHz.
Intel has already announced 3GHz Woodcrest CPUs.

The question isn't about when the chips will become available but when Apple chooses to put one in a system.

Which might be in the first batch of systems. Remember, we're all discussing a rumor from an anonymous source, not an actual product announcement.

Doctor Q
Jul 14, 2006, 04:02 PM
top heavy is just idiotic.Case designers aren't perfect, but they aren't idiots either. Some PCs have power supplies on top, despite the top heaviness and the extra path for the power cable. What's the reason? There must be some tradeoff involved or they'd never build them that way.

heisetax
Jul 14, 2006, 04:05 PM
A new case would be "fun" but what I care about is what it delivers, not how it looks when I crawl under my desk :)

For the low-end (single chip) towers, dual core Conroe makes more sense to me than Xeon, simply for cost reasons. (Though I'm eyeing the new Xeons for my first ever top-end Mac... with dual-duals!)

Two optical slots would be nice, allowing me to "wait and see" about next-gen optical formats.

My intention: to wait for 3Ghz+ Xeon, which sounds like it should only be a few months later. That's also time for a few little tweaks to be made if necessary, giving me something between a version A and version B machine.



Without a doubt. And in keeping with long tradition, the "less expensive" name-brand PC will mysteriously come with less (ports, software, even speed if Netburst lingers) than the Mac :)


From a purely math point of view the Mac will always loose out when compared to a like Windows unit. This will be easier yet to see with both machines using the same processors. A Mac User will add in the Mac experience, ease of use, better looking case, options that just work, Plug 'n Play compared to Plug 'n Pray & other items like total cost of ownership or need we say less headachs.

Bill the TaxMan

dongmin
Jul 14, 2006, 04:07 PM
A 2.66 Ghz Woodcrest will probably be faster than a 2.93Ghz Conroe. A 1.83Ghz Yonah is faster than a 3.2Ghz Pentium, right?;)I thought the two processors were identical (in a single processor config) except that the Woodcrests have a higher FSB (1066mhz vs. 1333mhz). According to the Anandtech review, the 1333mhz FSB gives you only about 3% boost in speed.

Core 2 Duo

2.13 ghz - $224 (2MB L2 cache)
2.40 ghz - $316
2.67 ghz - $530

Xeon 5100 series

2.00 ghz - $316
2.33 ghz - $455
2.66 ghz - $690

It makes more sense to go with a 2.4 ghz Conroe for a single-processor config, since it's cheaper than the 2.33 ghz Woodcrest. What I'd like to see:

GOOD
2.40 ghz Core 2 Duo - $1499

BETTER
2 x 2.00 ghz Xeon - $1999

BEST
2 x 2.67 ghz Xeon - $2799

Of course, if Apple were REALLY ambitious, they should release a mini tower using Conroes and release the Mac Pros in quad-only configs.

cloudnine
Jul 14, 2006, 04:08 PM
To charge $1800 for a system that only has 512MB is a real disappoitment. 1GB RAM oughta be standard, especially with Leopard being on the horizon.

Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.

I agree... my buddy got a macbook pro and it came standard with 512mb of ram. For the first 3 or 4 days, he thought he purchased a defective notebook, it ran so badly. Opening MS Office applications literally took minutes, and that was with nothing else open. He took it back into the Apple store and the rep told him that his problem was his ram, so he purchased another 1gb (1.5gb total), and now it runs perfectly. You'd think that with all of these intel machines being released and a huge selection of software not being Universal yet, that 1 gig of ram would be standard...

kinda a$$h0lish if you ask me. :mad:

kevin.rivers
Jul 14, 2006, 04:09 PM
What about SLI video card support? They should try and appeal to high end gamers by having a configuration comparable to Alienware or Dell's XPS. If Apple's hardware can now run Windows, Apple should really take a stab at this market. It will be hard to justify $3000 for a computer that doesn't have the latest cutting edge hardware. Dual 512MB nVidia GeForce 7900 GTX would be a nice start. Otherwise, the accusation of overpriced computers will be appropriate. Why would someone running Windows consider this purchase, if they can get better components for less money elsewhere. Is Apple really serious about taking market share away from PC companies? Or are they going to play it safe and target only the market that they already have?

They would have to move from the Intel reference boards to ATI(Crossfire) or the Nvidia 500 series.

Anandtech's Core 2 piece (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795) went into some of the details about Dual GPU support. Crossfire is shaky, and the Nvidia 500 isn't here, although the current line supports Core 2.

You do however need to go and look at current pricing. There would be 2 Woodcrests in the machines.

Fact is no one knows what Apple is going to do or has in the works. So please stop crying foul until what is happening is concrete.

The only people making the accusation of overpriced computers are those who:

1: Build their own computer
2: Don't know anything and just wants things at a cheaper price, no matter how reasonable it may be
3: People who pretend they want an Apple, so they can whine about the price: "I want to buy an Apple, but they cost soooo much! OMG TEH SUZORZS!", these people usually fall in with number 2 as well.

greenstork
Jul 14, 2006, 04:14 PM
I'm salivating for a new desktop as I have been limping along with my dual 1GHz mirrored drive door (wind tunnel) for the past few years. I'll likely buy a middle to top end Mac Pro as soon as they are released and although I'd love a dual woodcrest, I'll be happy too with a single conroe.

On a related note (rant)...

I think Apple is shooting themselves in the foot not coming out with some sort of digital media center / DVR. Along with a computer and television, it's the one electronic appliance that I cannot live without. The playing field is so ripe too -- TiVo is just establishing itself with cable companies and moving out of satellite, cable company DVR's suck, there is no easy ability to rip a DVD to your computer and put it in a library, there is no easy to use set top box option to buy movies.

Think about DAPs when the iPod came out, it's the same landscape. Sure, there were digital audio players that all paled in comparison to the iPod. I think Apple has that same opportunity with a media center/DVR.

The problem, I presume, is that the MPAA & broadcast association would never let it happen. Apple will never be granted permissions to sell movies if they come up with a device to rip DVD's or record television.

One can always hope. I know Apple could make a device that absolutely blows away everything that's out there right now, and it seems short sighted to not develop a product that begins to merge computers and television, this merger is inevitable. So while everyone's going off about FW800 ports in front and the location of the power supply, I'm wondering where the TV tuner and CableCard slots are.

FF_productions
Jul 14, 2006, 04:14 PM
2003: "In 12 months, we'll be at 3GHz".
Mid 2006: "I want to talk about 2.66GHz" although 4 cores running at 2.66GHz (Yum! :D ).

Steve Jobs really must have been embarassed after claiming we'd have 3 ghz when we still can't even pass 2.7 ghz without a huge unstable liquid cooling system. Maybe Intel will bring us 3 ghz next month, a quad 3 ghz Xeon, does that even exist?

My problem with having 4 cores at 2.6 ghz is what will the other Mac Pro's offer? One more month...

KEL9000
Jul 14, 2006, 04:14 PM
No, actually. Apple technically supports HD-DVD as well, since are a member of the DVD Forum, which backs HD-DVD. :cool:

I wasn't being a smartass.

The list of steering members excludes apple but includes sony. I don't think that that is relevant. The standard member list has everybody associated with DVDs in it.
http://www.dvdforum.org/about-steering.htm

I suspect they will choose one format over the other because all the systems (except potetially the MacPro) apple makes will only have one optical drive. Forcing them to choose a standard for media delivery.

heisetax
Jul 14, 2006, 04:16 PM
That's nice...

They'd better have something in between this and the iMac...


Apple has had an inbetween model for a long time. Low end where models change more often compared to a so called high end where a good model is made, then only minor changes are made every year or so. High end clock speed will still be down after 2 years. It sounds to me that Apple makes a high end then allows it to slide to a middle ground, ownly they forget to lower the price to mid ground.

The new Intel Macs are supposed to be top end again, so that means a general accross the board price increases. The price increases must mean we are getting a new high end product. Just wait a couple of generations & we'll have a mid-range Mac.

Bill the TaxMan

shamino
Jul 14, 2006, 04:17 PM
According to Appleinsider, the Mac Pro would have 2 4x and 1 8x PCIe slots. I see two problems with this. (1) All higher-end PC mobos out now have at least 1 16x slot, some have 2 for SLI/Crossfire.
Re-read the article.

It says there will be three available slots - 2 4x and 1 8x. These are the slots that will not be used by factory-bundled devices.

The bundled ATI X1800/X1900 video card will be in a 16x slot. It probably won't physically fit anywhere else!
(2) Why only 3 slots? PCs have 6 or so (as did the Power Mac 9500 & 9600) with a few regular PCI slots.
4 slots. 3 unused. Not 3 total.

Most PCs don't have more slots, either. Sure you can find a few counter-examples, but 6-slot systems are not common. And with the exception of the PM 9500/9600, Apple has never shipped a 6-slot system. (The Quadra 950 had 5. Everything else shipped with 4 or less.)
Why would Apple shoot itself in the foot like this? The Mac Pro is supposed to be a lot better than all other PCs. It would be nice to have 2 16x lanes for SLI and a few PCI slots for older expansion cards and cards that don't need the bandwidth of PCIe. Besides, this is supposed to be a Pro Mac, which means professional people would want to add a bunch of cards, not just 3. I'd expect a person working in something like movie production would want to have dual graphics cards, a fiber channel card to connect to an xServe RAID and maybe an M-Audio sound card for audio input. Since I don't work in movie production, I wouldn't know, but it would make sense.
You seem to think that a Pro system must have the capability of accepting every hardware device ever invented. (And how do you do this without making the case six feet tall?)

Dual video cards are only used by gamers. I doubt gamers are going to be interested in buying one of these, for the same reason they don't buy other Macs - the software comes out for other platforms first.

As for FC interfaces, they can work fine in any of the available slots. And there's no need for audio cards when you've got S/PDIF optical audio in/out.

Remember also that a studio won't be doing both video and audio editing on the same console! The people who are expert at one job are not going to be expert at the other. And if your studio is so strapped for cash that the different editors have to share a single computer, then you're in pretty sad shape!

I don't think you realize what you're asking for. A system that is capable of performing all possible tasks at once is just unrealistic. Nobody will ever equip a system like that, because no user will have those kinds of requirements.

Even in the PC world, where more slots are common, you almost never find a system that has actually filled all those slots with devices.

kevin.rivers
Jul 14, 2006, 04:26 PM
<snipped...>I don't think you realize what you're asking for. A system that is capable of performing all possible tasks at once is just unrealistic. Nobody will ever equip a system like that, because no user will have those kinds of requirements.

Even in the PC world, where more slots are common, you almost never find a system that has actually filled all those slots with devices.

Amen. It makes me sick to see people crying foul.

"I want 4 of every port/slot there is, in a case that is no more than a foot tall, plus 2 3Ghz processors, blu-ray, dual gpus, all for $1500! And if Apple doesn't give it to me, I will never buy anything from them ever!"

Even though they will never even use them(all the ports/slots). Most people will fill the x16 and maybe an old school PCI slot. Thats about it.

cloudnine
Jul 14, 2006, 04:27 PM
Dual video cards are only used by gamers. I doubt gamers are going to be interested in buying one of these, for the same reason they don't buy other Macs - the software comes out for other platforms first.

What about support for 2 30" cinema displays? You need two video cards to do that, right?

ShnikeJSB
Jul 14, 2006, 04:30 PM
ONLY DDR2-667?!? :confused:

Come on Apple, you'd BETTER use DDR2-800 or I'll be pissed! :mad:

edenwaith
Jul 14, 2006, 04:30 PM
I'm not concerned so much if this rumor is true or not, but I've never fully understood the need for more than one optical drives for most of the time. At work I've occasionally needed more than one optical drive to create back ups of software CDs, but that's about it. At home, however, the need just isn't there. The retarted Dell we have at home has two optical drives because Dell was too cheap to put in a single combo DVD-ROM/CD-RW. Instead they put in a CD-RW and a CD-ROM (it was SUPPOSED to have come with a DVD-ROM, but they didn't put it in). Times like that are just dumb.

Personally, I'd opt for more hard drive space. There was one PM model that supported up to four internal hard drives, I believe.

Mr. Mister
Jul 14, 2006, 04:31 PM
If There's No BTO Option For A Single-processor 2.66 Configuration, That Will Be Frustrating™.

Marx55
Jul 14, 2006, 04:33 PM
Dual optical drive is fantastic. Actually, even cheap PC-Windows boxes have had them for ages as a standard feature in basically of models.

On the other hand, a quiet Mac would be great. If possible, with no fans. Quiet. As the cube was.

edenwaith
Jul 14, 2006, 04:34 PM
ONLY DDR2-667?!? :confused:

Come on Apple, you'd BETTER use DDR2-800 or I'll be pissed! :mad:


No, they better equip every new Mac with 10 Terabytes of DDR9-5000 RAM! And they will also include a Raid 5 configuration at 20 Exabytes! And the entire machine will be smaller than your fingernail.

But it will then come equipped with a 16Mhz Motorola 680x0 chip.

LaDirection
Jul 14, 2006, 04:36 PM
"Steve Jobs really must have been embarassed after claiming we'd have 3 ghz when we still can't even pass 2.7 ghz without a huge unstable liquid cooling system."

I think we'll see more cores per cpu before we see 3GHz. IMHO, 4,8 or more cores at 2.66 is far better than 1 or 2 cores at 3GHz.

""Steve Jobs really must have been embarassed after claiming we'd have 3 ghz when we still can't even pass 2.7 ghz without a huge unstable liquid cooling system."

IBM never produced chips that could run at 2.7GHz. In 2004, IBM was stuck at 2.2GHz instead of the 3GHz promised. Apple requested that chips be overclocked to 2.5GHz. In 2005, IBM was stuck at 2.3 GHZ, these chips were also overclocked to 2.7GHz. This year we are at Dual Cores 2.5Ghz. Even if Apple uses nothing but 2.66 GHz Dual cores, they will still be the fastest, non-overcloked chips that Apple has ever used.

"IMHO, 4,8 or more cores at 2.66 is far better than 1 or 2 cores at 3GHz."

8 cores?! Wow, maybe one day! But 2 or more cores/CPU are only good if your app can use them. Most applications, and in fact many of Apple, do not use more than 2 cores/CPUS. The Quad core G5's are a good example how the 3rd and 4th core are 98% or the time unused. A Dual 3GHz to a user would be much more usuefull than an 8 core 2.5GHz!


P.S. The number ONE problem that Apple must address in their pro line is the lack of Hard Drive bays! We need at least 4 HD, please! An internal 10,000 RPM RAID array is music to teh ears of pro video and film users.

edenwaith
Jul 14, 2006, 04:39 PM
2003: "In 12 months, we'll be at 3GHz".
Mid 2006: "I want to talk about 2.66GHz" although 4 cores running at 2.66GHz (Yum! :D ).

Kind of odd/funny how we seem to be going backwards in processor speeds. Instead of 3.6 GHz Pentiums, we are looking at 2.x GHz Intel Cores. It would be interesting to see how well a single Core processor matches up to PowerPC, or a Pentium, or AMD.

However, I am finding one of my predicitions finally happen...it appears that a ceiling has been currently met on how fast the current line of processors can go, and now we are relying on multiple cores/processors to distribute work, instead of relying on just one fast chip.

So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).

Cowinacape
Jul 14, 2006, 04:46 PM
I don't know if I am real big on the rumored 512 meg of ram (geesh) for the bottom end tower, c'mon Steve would throwing a gig in there really break the bank?? I do like the idea of dual optical drives though ( I do copy my cd's for use in my garage/workshop, so I don't wreck the originals).

An extra one or two pci slots would of been nice, (sucks, that some video cards wind up taking two slots, due to their cooling setup)

Timepass
Jul 14, 2006, 04:49 PM
For dual opitical drives I say abotu time. Almost all cheap Pc have 2 opical drives. I like having them because I like to leave disk that I use a lot in the system. A lot easier that have to swap them time when running different programs.

As for the PSU at the top I like that design. The PSU is going to generated the most heat over all and that heat has to go somewhere.

Put it at the bottom it going to suck cooling air way from the graphic card and the CPU to cool it self and add more heat inside the case to make cooling the CPU and graphic card even worse. Or put it at the top where it will help pull cooling air over the CPU and graphic card and pulling heat off of them. Then pushing it al out the back. I like the 2nd one more. The design I would like would be a BTX mount and PSU at the top. That would put the CPU at the bottom, then graphic card and then PSU at the top. That way things that have the worse problem over heating get the coldest air and moves up from there. The hottest object is at the top of the case so the over all temp in the case is lower.

That just my logic of it. Balance wise it not go effect it to much. it not like you are going to move you Tower that offen and it going to be out of the way so the center of gravity being a little higher is not going to be big deal.

Cowinacape
Jul 14, 2006, 04:51 PM
....while I am at it, hopefully there will me room for more than just 2 hard drives inside the case........

Morpheus_
Jul 14, 2006, 04:54 PM
Dear Steve,

The iMac might be fine, but I don't need to pay for another monitor - I have a 20" and maybe I'll update that someday. I like expandability/flexibility in my displays, as well as my hard drives and hopefully my CPU.

The Mac Mini is not powerful enough.

The Mac Pro is too expensive, too top-end.

So Steve, will there be a "Mac" (not Pro) line? (How about "Big Mac"? Oh, that's taken...)

I basically want something that is good for gaming (in OS X and hence also in Windows, if necessary), but not ludicrously expensive. Something like I would have built myself in the years past - a good but not ridiculous CPU, a good but not ridiculous graphics card, and a nice amount of memory and storage -- then just throw it in a tower.

Maybe there will be a lower-end "Mac Pro", but it just doesn't make sense following the "Pro" nomenclature.

Silentwave
Jul 14, 2006, 04:54 PM
ONLY DDR2-667?!? :confused:

Come on Apple, you'd BETTER use DDR2-800 or I'll be pissed! :mad:


Actually I'm surprised Aidenshaw didn't pick up on this.

The specs provided are
CLEARLY FAKE!

You'd think they'd at least get the RAM right.

Woodcrest requires the use of FB-DIMM (fully-buffered DIMM) RAM, dual channel, available at 533 or 667mhz speeds. ECC built in. Though technically this is using DDR2 chips, it is referenced as a distinct type, including in Intel's publications. It does not use plain DDR like the low end spec posted in the article (and will transition to DDR3 as those become available).
(edit: toned down the sizes, they were hurting my eyes :) )

~Shard~
Jul 14, 2006, 04:55 PM
I wasn't being a smartass.

I wasn't saying you were... :confused: Just stating the fact that Apple hasn't exclusively chosen Blu Ray over HD-DVD, that's all. :cool:

sockgap
Jul 14, 2006, 04:58 PM
It would help cooling to put the power supply on the top.
This is why newer energy efficient refridgerators put the compressor on the top.

shamino
Jul 14, 2006, 05:13 PM
What about support for 2 30" cinema displays? You need two video cards to do that, right?
Nope. The GeForce 6800 card Apple offered on their AGP-based G5 towers had two dual-link DVI ports.

Today's high-end PCIe offering - an ATI Quadro 4500 - also does, but it consumes two slots (one card, but the fan is too large to allow anything in the slot next to it.)

Looking at PC product offerings by ATI (http://www.ati.com/products/workstation/fireglmatrix.html), you can see that they also offer video cards with two dual-link DVI ports on a single card. You can even get this on a Radeon X1900 series card (http://www.ati.com/products/radeonx1900/radeonx1900xtx/specs.html).

Given that this is easily available for the PC world, there's no reason why it can't also be made available for the Mac (aside from someone deciding to write the device driver, of course.)

gnasher729
Jul 14, 2006, 05:20 PM
A 2.66 Ghz Woodcrest will probably be faster than a 2.93Ghz Conroe. A 1.83Ghz Yonah is faster than a 3.2Ghz Pentium, right?;)

Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest all use Intel's new "Core Microarchitecture" (a bit confusing: Core Duo does _not_ use "Core Microarchitecture", it is basically an improved Pentium III. The Core 2 Duo chips use Core Microarchitecture).

All three chips produce the same performance at the same clockspeed. Cache size may make a difference, but the Conroe models starting at 2.4 GHz all have the large 4 MB cache. So a single 2.66 GHz Woodcrest will be substantially slower than a 2.93 GHz Conroe. Not that it matters; the 2.93 GHz Conroe is extremely overpriced and unlikely to be used in any Macintosh.

I personally would expect 2.0GHz Conroe, 2.66 GHz Conroe, 2 x 2 GHz Woodcrest and 2 x 2.66 GHz Woodcrest for a wide range from cheap to maximum performance.

Eidorian
Jul 14, 2006, 05:21 PM
Given that this is easily available for the PC world, there's no reason why it can't also be made available for the Mac (aside from someone deciding to write the device driver, of course.)Ok, here's ANOTHER can of worms. Since we're on EFI now and can boot in Windows. It means our video cards, etc. don't have Open Firmware BIOS. Does that mean ANY "Windows" video card will work as long as OS X has drivers for it? Does OS X even have generic VGA drivers?

briansolomon
Jul 14, 2006, 05:26 PM
It's about time. For a company that prides itself on innovations, features, and ease of use this is something that should not just be coming to fruition now...and should have never been eliminated from the G5 during the change from G4 <<<weird wording but I think you all will get the idea

shamino
Jul 14, 2006, 05:26 PM
Kind of odd/funny how we seem to be going backwards in processor speeds. Instead of 3.6 GHz Pentiums, we are looking at 2.x GHz Intel Cores. It would be interesting to see how well a single Core processor matches up to PowerPC, or a Pentium, or AMD.
It just means that Intel has finally publicly recognized the validity of the MHz Myth.

Raw clock speed is meaningless. You can get better performance at a slower clock speed if you can increase parallelism. This includes features like superscalar architecture (where multiple instructions are executed per clock), deep pipelining, hyperthreading, SIMD instructions, and multi-core chips.
However, I am finding one of my predicitions finally happen...it appears that a ceiling has been currently met on how fast the current line of processors can go, and now we are relying on multiple cores/processors to distribute work, instead of relying on just one fast chip.
That's a part of the equation, but not all of it.

Higher clock speeds are possible, but it's not worth the effort. Pumping up the clock speed creates serious problems in terms of power consumption and heat dissipation. Leaving the clock speed lower, but increasing parallelism will also boost performance, and keeps the power curve down at manageable levels.

It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".

There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early 2007, and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.

And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.

(FWIW, Intel is looking to Sun as a rival here. Sun's latest chip - the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) - currently ships in an 8-core configuration, with each core capable of running four threads at a time, and only consuming 72W of power. Even at 1.2GHz - the top speed they're currently shipping at - this makes for a very nice server.)

Xenious
Jul 14, 2006, 05:27 PM
Dual drive slots are cool, but the design is boring. Don't get me wrong I love my G5 powermac I was just hoping for a new or different design for the next ones...Maybe the same but square or smaller or something. Oh well it doesn't matter I'm still buying. :)

Silentwave
Jul 14, 2006, 05:28 PM
All three chips produce the same performance at the same clockspeed. Cache size may make a difference, but the Conroe models starting at 2.4 GHz all have the large 4 MB cache. So a single 2.66 GHz Woodcrest will be substantially slower than a 2.93 GHz Conroe. Not that it matters; the 2.93 GHz Conroe is extremely overpriced and unlikely to be used in any Macintosh.


While I agree that the 2.93 Conroe is unlikely to make its way into the macs, I don't think the difference will be 'substantial.' The Woodcrest has a faster FSB, and most other variables are equal except clock speed. Based on the benchmarks on the various Conroe versions, I think that the 2.66 Woodcrest will offer performance only very slightly slower than Conroe 2.93.

I personally would expect 2.0GHz Conroe, 2.66 GHz Conroe, 2 x 2 GHz Woodcrest and 2 x 2.66 GHz Woodcrest for a wide range from cheap to maximum performance.
Just a nit, but IIRC isn't the codename for conroe based chips running at 2.4 and below with 2MB L2 caches Allendale? (there is a separate 2.4 with 4mb L2)
I'm still not sure whether Apple will go all woodcrest to get better prices on chips and RAM (FB-DIMM is exclusive to woodcrest in apple's potential lineup)but I would expect either 2x2GHz or 2x2.3GHz as a low end quad, and either a 2x2.66 or 2x3.0 for the high end. Perhaps the 3.0GHz will be a BTO option for the 2x2.66, like the 2.16 was a BTO originally on the 2.0 MBP.

"One more thing, you know we complained about not breaking 3GHz with Power-PC, so for our latest quad, we figured you'd all like to finally do that. So, you can order your top level 2.66 Xeon quad as a build to order with two of the 3.0GHz Xeon chips!"

wizz0bang
Jul 14, 2006, 05:29 PM
Here are my guesses/wishes:

Mac - New Mini tower case (2 HD, 2 CD bays)

Mac $1499
(Conroe) Core 2 Duo 2.4Ghz 4MB cache
1GB DDR2-800
ATI Radeon X1800 256MB
250GB HD
2x front USB, 1x front FW400
4x rear USB, 2x rear FW400, 1x rear FW800
Digital + analog audio I/O
Bluetooth and Airport extreme
Dual gb ethernet
Keyboard and mightymouse

Mac eXtreme $1999
Same as above, but with 2.93GHz Core 2 extreme (maybe overclocked to 3GHz+ so Steve can gloat)


Mac Pro: Similar case to previous G5 towers, all will be quad (dual dual).

Mac Pro $1999
2x Woodcrest 2.0Ghz
1GB DDR667
ATI Radeon X1800 256MB
2x250GB raid
ATI Radeon

Mac Pro $2499
2x Woodcrest 2.66Ghz

Mac Pro $3299
2x Woodcrest 3.0Ghz
More storage and more Ram

Look for same hot video upgrade options.

Come on Steve, I know you can do it!

Silentwave
Jul 14, 2006, 05:34 PM
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
Quarter 4 this year will see the X6900 conroe extreme at 3.2GHz.


So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).

There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early 2007, and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.

And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.



8 core should be out sometime between end of 2006 and beginning of 2007 with the quad core Clovertown processors (based on woodcrest) available in dual chip configurations. And it'll only get better from there.

Which reminds me, though slightly OT... this is a good reason why iMac may well get Conroe now or perhaps get Merom now but transition to a desktop chip by the time Santa Rosa comes out. The new chipset/socket means new logic board, and by the time that comes out the Kenstfield quad core chips on the consumer desktop end will start arriving. I don't yet know how far kentsfield will be scaling either up or down as far as clock speed/heat, but if quad core starts moving into the consumer dekstop market, they will need a very powerful processor: either Conroe or Kentsfield.

shamino
Jul 14, 2006, 05:35 PM
Ok, here's ANOTHER can of worms. Since we're on EFI now and can boot in Windows. It means our video cards, etc. don't have Open Firmware BIOS. Does that mean ANY "Windows" video card will work as long as OS X has drivers for it? Does OS X even have generic VGA drivers?
Interesting question, but I don't think any of us here will have the answers.

PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.

As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.

Generic VGA drivers? I'm sure they were developed - they'd be very useful during that time when OS X/Intel was internal-only. But I wouldn't expect them to be bundled with a shipping copy of the system software.

Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.

Eidorian
Jul 14, 2006, 05:43 PM
Interesting question, but I don't think any of us here will have the answers.

PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.EFI can emulate BIOS though. It's basically what Boot Camp and the original Windows hack did.

As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.I've rarely noticed third party hardware that requires drivers. Most of them simply say "Requires OS 8.x, 9.x., 10.x". Of course newer things like 802.11g and USB 2.0 are going to need a version of OS X.



Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.You don't need a special ROM code for the auxiliary hardware. The video BIOS doesn't change when you boot between OS X and Windows.

Silentwave
Jul 14, 2006, 05:47 PM
Mac Pro $1999
2x Woodcrest 2.0Ghz
1GB DDR667


That price point for a quad would not be easy. A dual processor Xeon 2GHz woodcrest Dell workstationwith 1GB FB-DIMM 533 running Linux (cheaper than the windoze version) with a 750W power supply is nearly $2900. And even though I did my best to equalize some of the things to be more like the features of the powermac (ports, vid cards etc.), it still has the potential to be much more expensive.

gerrycurl
Jul 14, 2006, 05:59 PM
the question still remains--will the powermacs be able to use standard, off the shelf, pc video cards?

i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.

what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.

think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.

that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.

gerrycurl
Jul 14, 2006, 06:00 PM
the question still remains--will the powermacs be able to use standard, off the shelf, pc video cards?

i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.

what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.

think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.

that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.

oh, btw, i did some of my own investigations and found this site:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html

which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.

Eidorian
Jul 14, 2006, 06:02 PM
oh, btw, i did some of my own investigations and found this site:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html

which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.You can get the 7xxx series in the Power Mac G5.

wmmk
Jul 14, 2006, 06:07 PM
the question still remains--will the powermacs be able to use standard, off the shelf, pc video cards?

i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.

what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.

think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.

that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.

oh, btw, i did some of my own investigations and found this site:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html

which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.
i'v actually heard that with a normal PC, you can make almost any NVIDIA card compatible with mac, but it takes a bit of geekery and hackery.

cr2sh
Jul 14, 2006, 06:11 PM
The thing I like least about this rumor is that it specifies only a 320GB harddrive.

The current configs (quad g5) were released in October of last year, in that time harddrive capacities have increased well beyond that (320) small number.

The new machines will get 500GB drives I have to believe.

:confused:

wmmk
Jul 14, 2006, 06:19 PM
The thing I like least about this rumor is that it specifies only a 320GB harddrive.

The current configs (quad g5) were released in October of last year, in that time harddrive capacities have increased well beyond that (320) small number.

The new machines will get 500GB drives I have to believe.

:confused:
320 would be the standard. you could upgrade to a terabyte if there are still two HDD bays.

Silentwave
Jul 14, 2006, 06:22 PM
320 would be the standard. you could upgrade to a terabyte if there are still two HDD bays.

Heck you could have 1.5TB with the new Seagate 750GB drives!

wmmk
Jul 14, 2006, 06:27 PM
Heck you could have 1.5TB with the new Seagate 750GB drives!
dang, I didn't know those existed!

shawnce
Jul 14, 2006, 06:45 PM
Agreed. I can make an argument for the consumer machines, where perhaps 512 MB is sufficient for basic users. Specifically, why force them to pay more for 1 GB if they don't need it. But when it comes to the Pro machines, as if anyone buying one of these beasts is not going to require at least 2 GB of RAM, let alone 1 GB. No one buys a quad Xeon Powermac to just surf the Internet and check their e-mail. :cool:

Personally I go the BTO route at Apple.com for my PowerMacs and downgrade all RAM to the minimum cost and buy my RAM from a trusted 3rd party vendor for a savings of at least 10% if not more so.

Mr. Mister
Jul 14, 2006, 06:55 PM
Power supply at the top? Blah! :mad: I hate the power supply on the top, not that
it would keep me from purchasing a new MacPro though. ;)
Power supplies produce a lot of heat. It makes great sense according to simply the most basic laws of thermodynamics.

Shadow
Jul 14, 2006, 07:02 PM
Why be limited to 2? Why not 3, 4, 5 or 6? I also want quad-10GHz Woodcrests with 20GB of DDR6-8000 RAM, with 2exobytes of HDD space. AND room to upgrade. Oh, and quad 7900GTXs. For £1000.

Ok, that never gonna happen, but it illustrates the point that people want more and more for less and less.

guzhogi
Jul 14, 2006, 07:11 PM
Re-read the article.

It says there will be three available slots - 2 4x and 1 8x. These are the slots that will not be used by factory-bundled devices.

The bundled ATI X1800/X1900 video card will be in a 16x slot. It probably won't physically fit anywhere else!
4 slots. 3 unused. Not 3 total.

Most PCs don't have more slots, either. Sure you can find a few counter-examples, but 6-slot systems are not common. And with the exception of the PM 9500/9600, Apple has never shipped a 6-slot system. (The Quadra 950 had 5. Everything else shipped with 4 or less.)
You seem to think that a Pro system must have the capability of accepting every hardware device ever invented. (And how do you do this without making the case six feet tall?)

Dual video cards are only used by gamers. I doubt gamers are going to be interested in buying one of these, for the same reason they don't buy other Macs - the software comes out for other platforms first.

As for FC interfaces, they can work fine in any of the available slots. And there's no need for audio cards when you've got S/PDIF optical audio in/out.

Remember also that a studio won't be doing both video and audio editing on the same console! The people who are expert at one job are not going to be expert at the other. And if your studio is so strapped for cash that the different editors have to share a single computer, then you're in pretty sad shape!

I don't think you realize what you're asking for. A system that is capable of performing all possible tasks at once is just unrealistic. Nobody will ever equip a system like that, because no user will have those kinds of requirements.

Even in the PC world, where more slots are common, you almost never find a system that has actually filled all those slots with devices.

You're probably right about the slots, but I never said that it had to do everything at once. Just saying that it is my understanding that Apple is trying to make this a workstation (or at least that's what the rumor sites make it out to be) and it might as well have as much power as possible.

Also, as for the sound card, what about sound in? Some musicians might want MIDI in/out. I know, a lot of MIDI instruments come w/ USB now, but some musicians might want MIDI. Also, gamers aren't the only ones who might want/need to use 2+ graphics cards. What about CAD designers? Some of their stuff is pretty graphic intensive. Plus, since MacTels can run Windows, gamers might buy Macs, too. Just saying that some people might want this stuff, not necesarily everyone. To be honest, I don't care. Different strokes for different folks.

On a completely different note, I wonder what the Intel xServes will be like, along with new xServe RAIDs. If I read Apple's xServe RAID site, correctly, it uses ATA/100, not SATA. I wonder if/when Apple would upgrade? If I'm right (correct me if I'm wrong) SATA II has a max transfer rate of 3 Gb/s (or 750 MB/s), though I've also heard 300 MB/s. ATA/100's is 100 MB/s. Also, Western Digital's Raptor X is a 10,000 RPM drive and only has a SATA interface while all the ATA/100 drives I've seen are just 7200 RPM. People who need high bandwidth might want this.

guzhogi
Jul 14, 2006, 07:16 PM
Power supplies produce a lot of heat. It makes great sense according to simply the most basic laws of thermodynamics.

I'm no physicist, but even I know that warmer air rises so if the power supply was at the bottom, all that heat would go up the entire case (not counting whatever fans are in there) and make it harder to cool maybe. But as I said, I'm no physicist & I don't know how all this all works. It would be cool (pun not intended) if it were possible to create a vacuum inside, that woould help solve heating issues since (if I remember my high school physics) temperature is just how much energy matter has. If there's no matter in the case other than the components, then it should be pretty cold in there.

GFLPraxis
Jul 14, 2006, 07:23 PM
2003: "In 12 months, we'll be at 3GHz".
Mid 2006: "I want to talk about 2.66GHz" although 4 cores running at 2.66GHz (Yum! :D ).

Who cares about GHz? In the benchmarks I'm seeing a 2.66 GHz Core 2 Duo is easily outperforming a 3.8 GHz Pentium 4.

amac4me
Jul 14, 2006, 07:26 PM
WWDC ... it's getting closer ... can't wait to see what's announced. Oh yeah ... we'll see the preview of Leopard too.

Bring it on Steve :D

Cowinacape
Jul 14, 2006, 07:35 PM
All this talk about gamers, and video cards, wonder if they will intro a SLi Macpro *wipes away drool* :D

xPismo
Jul 14, 2006, 07:47 PM
WWDC ... it's getting closer ... can't wait to see what's announced. Oh yeah ... we'll see the preview of Leopard too.

Bring it on Steve :D

Yeah. I don't believe a word. No powercord at the top, no tweaked G5 case, no way. Those bits throw the rest into dispute. I think we will all be shocked at what The Steve has for us at wwdc.

OTOH, its been great to finally read the benchmark figures for the new apple processors. It hit me that the mac community will finally have overclocking hardware readily available! Wow!

But this rumor just dosn't look or smell right.

Silentwave
Jul 14, 2006, 07:55 PM
Personally I go the BTO route at Apple.com for my PowerMacs and downgrade all RAM to the minimum cost and buy my RAM from a trusted 3rd party vendor for a savings of at least 10% if not more so.

sounds like a plan for me too. I just hope the prices drop soon and the selection gets a bit better :(

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?Submit=ENE&N=2010170147+1052121731&Subcategory=147&description=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=

RichP
Jul 14, 2006, 07:56 PM
Why is everyone talking about overclocking these machines? To overclock, the MB has to support changing the multipliers (if the chip is unlocked, which they wont be) and/or FSB, along with voltage, etc. I doubt Apple will be providing us with such BIOS/EFI settings.

SeaFox
Jul 14, 2006, 08:12 PM
I suspect they will choose one format over the other because all the systems (except potetially the MacPro) apple makes will only have one optical drive. Forcing them to choose a standard for media delivery.

Maybe not... (http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=190300953)

heisetax
Jul 14, 2006, 08:24 PM
Doh! Well, again IMHO, it is my preference to have only one optical drive built in. I could always add an external later.


Why do the rest of us have to settle for your preference?

I know people that have their systems running that could get by with a 5-10 GB hard drive. Does that mean that we should feel that all systems should only have a 5-10 GB hard drive, maybe a CD drive & since we all will have the same small needs a floppy drive. A DVD writer could make a complete backup in most ccases. Why would we need one of them. So why have more than one external 5 1/4" slot.

I may only run probrams that I can download on the internet, why then even one external drive slot?

Sounds a little far out. But what is really far out? Everybody has different needs & wants. Many Windows systems have the ability to have at least 4 internally mounted external 5 1/4" drives 2-4 or more 3.5" external drives, several internal 3.5" drives, 10-in-1 flash card reader/writers & many more things. My old Mac Clones had space for 4 5 1/4" external & 2 3 1/2" external drives, with either 2 or 4 internal 3.5" drives.

There are people that need to run many different drives at once. They don't all want to have more external drives with all of those many, many cords than they absolutely have to. Right now I have 3 external drives hooked to my 17" PowerBook. Then there is usually a flash drive or 2 hook up to this system.

Remember that everyone does their computing different. That means that only a certain group would be happy with what you think is all that needs to be in a system. Others will think that you have too much.

My wife & me each have MDD PowerMac G4's for our desktop units. They both have DVD burne & CD burner drives. I miss the other slots that I have on myy Clones. I may have up to 6 internal 3.5" drives mounted. Usually a couple of SCSI drives, a couple PATA drives, & a couple SATA drives.s I still have 3-6 drives attached externally plus a NAS drive. Most external drives are FW800, with a couple FW400 drives & a 3 CF drives tower by Lexar.

What is the correct amount of drives? To me it is whatever it takes to properly get your computer job down. So to you, it will always be, why more than 1 internal 5 1/4" drive.

Bill the TaxMan

heisetax
Jul 14, 2006, 08:27 PM
[QUOTE=bigandy]the size and weight of the power supply makes it damn stupid to put in the top.

top heavy is just idiotic.

i'd love to see dual optical drive bays and the same basic design as the G5. it's a great design, so why the need for change in the first place... :rolleyes:[/QUOTE


I always thought that the power supply was on top because of the heat generated by it. Since heat rises, it wouldn't pass over the rest of the computer on its way out. I still agree with you about the weight part though.

Bill the TaxMan

Multimedia
Jul 14, 2006, 08:30 PM
This is good news for me.. it will make it easy to resist buying one this year. No 3ghz xeon, no bluray, no new case design.I agree as I am waiting for the 8 core model with Leopard while I continue to limp along on the Quad G5. ;) I run an external Optical on top of my Quad G5 so this would be a nice addition. But I also run an ATA/133 HD inside on top of my optical on it's spare bus port, so it's really not much of an improvement from an internal HD perspective.

What's great is the idea of Apple holding the prices the same in the middle and top while lowering the bottom model's price. Lowers the barrier to entry in this class of machine. But I do think this series is a good transitional setup for those who can't wait for Leopard and have been waiting for Intel longer than those of us with the last of the G5s - especially those coming from G4 Power Macs that are way long in the tooth.

Multimedia
Jul 14, 2006, 08:34 PM
Burn two DVD's at once and DVD copying.How would you burn two DVDs at once Eldorian? I don't know of any software that lets you do this do you? :confused:

I agree it would be nice. But I can't imagine how.

Squire
Jul 14, 2006, 08:50 PM
Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.
*bold added
Where have you been shopping recently? Only one model PowerMac has ever had two optical drive bay.

The MDD G4 PowerMac towers (August 2002-June 2004) have two optical drive bays. The G4 PowerMacs that came before only have one (the lower bay is only big enough for floppy-size devices, like zip drives.) The G5 PowerMacs only have one externally-accessible bay of any size.

I would love the ability to install two optical drives, but your claim that Apple is currently shipping this somewhere is simply not true.

I think a brush-up lesson on the present perfect tense is in order. :D


Case designers aren't perfect, but they aren't idiots either. Some PCs have power supplies on top, despite the top heaviness and the extra path for the power cable. What's the reason? There must be some tradeoff involved or they'd never build them that way.

Good point. I just realized that my PC case has its power supply on the top. It's just a cheap-o case and it has never fallen over. I've never noticed any top-heaviness, as a matter of fact. In addition, the positioning of the cord hasn't caused any problems. In fact, it might actually be a better position for me-- while there is clutter on both sides of the box, there's nothing on top, making it easy to unplug.

-Squire

P.S. greenstork, where did your 'tar go? It's always been one of my favorites.

TheAnswer
Jul 14, 2006, 09:00 PM
I'm going to guess that the power supply on top will be like the MDD models, and therefore add rooms for more hard drives and optical drives.

Either that, or the guy that made up these specs figured that mimicing the MDD structure would add street cred to the rumor of the two optical drives.

Either way, between the case redesign rumor and the Conroe vs. Woodcrest rumor, looks like WWDC will really boost the credibility of one rumors site and smash the other's credibility to pieces (unless they're both wrong).

Squire
Jul 14, 2006, 09:12 PM
Here are my guesses/wishes...

I like your line of thinking. You know, what if Apple just released 4 Mac Pro models? Or offered 2 Mac Pro models and 2 iMac Pro models. The bottom two could have Conroe chips and the top two could have 2 x Woodcrest chips. Perhaps have an ever so slight case design difference between the two (i.e. slightly smaller on the low end or charcoal black on the upper end). Because, when you think of it, "prosumers" who already own a display are faced with a difficult buying decision with the current lineup.

-Squire

Cowinacape
Jul 14, 2006, 09:14 PM
I really don't see the need for any case changes for the towers (other than adding at least one more 5 inch bay, which I am all for) instead of redeigning the case for the sake of it, why not pocket the saving in design, and tooling, and pass some along to the consumer. I don't recall any big case changes to the mini, or imac in the G5 - intel change over.

Foxglove9
Jul 14, 2006, 09:22 PM
I think the current case is getting a little old looking and needs a change. It still holds up to pc cases and is beautiful inside. My compaints are how heavy it is and how the handles cut through my hands when I try to lift it. I'd really like to see them change that a little.

I personally would like to see something like the macbooks, in white or black.

I really don't see the need for any case changes for the towers (other than adding at least one more 5 inch bay, which I am all for) instead of redeigning the case for the sake of it, why not pocket the saving in design, and tooling, and pass some along to the consumer. I don't recall any big case changes to the mini, or imac in the G5 - intel change over.

illegalprelude
Jul 14, 2006, 09:25 PM
im with the others, im not jumping on the ship till they offer me Blue-Ray. Till then, I got everything I need in my 1.6 :cool: :D

nxent
Jul 14, 2006, 09:27 PM
don't see why people are voting negative for this, aside from the imminent demise of the G5. anyone notice with intel's batch of processors it takes a fair amount of research to know which is faster. merom? conroe?? that 'thing' that merom has that conroe doesn't. or is it the other way around...? is it marketing? who knows. one thing i will definitely miss with powerpc is the fact that it was obvious which was faster. G4's beat G3's, G5's beat G4's. G4's and G5's have velocity engine or some vector equivalent, G3's don't. And that's about as complicated as it got. i formally surrender trying to follow intel's processor updates... swear they have one every week. not that i'm complaining, of course...

oh, and one drive for blueray, one for dvd. i think the current casing is fine, just needs that additional drive bay

Silentwave
Jul 14, 2006, 09:34 PM
Either way, between the case redesign rumor and the Conroe vs. Woodcrest rumor, looks like WWDC will really boost the credibility of one rumors site and smash the other's credibility to pieces (unless they're both wrong).
No, I don't think its possible to either make ThinkSecret's credibility either better or worse without disrupting the balance of the space/time continuum. Unless of course there are powerbook G5s on Tuesday August 8th during WWDC. In that case, the universe will vanish instantly and be replaced with something even more inexplicable.

Eidorian
Jul 14, 2006, 09:47 PM
How would you burn two DVDs at once Eldorian? I don't know of any software that lets you do this do you? :confused:

I agree it would be nice. But I can't imagine how.Uh, you can use Finder if you wanted to. Just put in two discs, drag the files on, and hit burn. I'm talking data. I should have tried burning to images last night using Disk Utility. Well, I could have but one at x2 and the other at x16. :D

gekko513
Jul 14, 2006, 10:08 PM
The pricing seems reasonable compared to the current models.

I agree that it would be nice to have a cheaper upgradable model, but unless they introduce a new middle range with a different and cheaper design all around, I don't see it happening.

shigzeo
Jul 14, 2006, 10:09 PM
there have not been enough reasons other than the 12" PB to be very excited about any computer for a while at apple. Suddenly, macbook and the new macpro look to be delivering, no matter the specs something worthy of a handclap. no money now, but next year or the next, there will be a new mac for me. just sold my ibook to buy a beautiful opus fidelio bicycle. it is much faster downhill than any intel core 2 duo "extreme".

trogdor!
Jul 14, 2006, 10:20 PM
The current powermac g5's have 1 16x PCI-E slot for the video card along with 2 - 4x and 1 - 8x PCI-E slots. Video cards are about the only thing right now that can even use all 16 lanes of the PCI-E bus. I am not saying future things wont, but thats how it currently stands.

kered22
Jul 14, 2006, 10:38 PM
Another possible reason for moving the power supply to the top, there are a fair number of the current G5s blowing their power supplies. To replace those, the entire G5 has to be disassembled. I sure hope Apple will put some beefier power supplies in so we won't have to deal with so many blowing, but just in case, I can imagine them wanting to do this.

For those considering the 750GB Seagate perpendicular recording drives, you may want to run by this barefeats page and read the caution notes:
http://www.barefeats.com/hard78.html

Being an early adopter can be fun, but you get exposed to some risks.

shawnce
Jul 14, 2006, 10:48 PM
For those considering the 750GB Seagate perpendicular recording drives

get perpendicular (http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/research/recording_head/pr/PerpendicularAnimation.html)

Sean.Perrin
Jul 14, 2006, 10:54 PM
Not a chance in the near future. Blu Ray and Sony are in utter shambles right now.

Sony really is in shambles... what is wrong with that company? They've really lost any focus they might have had and some terrible ideas in have come and inevitably gone. (Will the PS3 be next?).

4God
Jul 14, 2006, 10:56 PM
Why do the rest of us have to settle for your preference?

You don't.
Ummm..nobody said you had to settle for my preference. :rolleyes: That's exactly it, my preference, get over it.
Last I checked, this is a forum where I could express my opinion, and as stated
in the post you quoted from, I was giving my opinion not saying that everybody should agree with my preference.

jiggie2g
Jul 14, 2006, 10:58 PM
How would you burn two DVDs at once Eldorian? I don't know of any software that lets you do this do you? :confused:

I agree it would be nice. But I can't imagine how.


Uhhhh Nero Burning ROM does , oops i forgot there is no Nero for Mac just plain TOAST..lol

I just love my Dual 16x NEC ND-3550A's :D ...burn baby burn.

Also if this is the Best Apple can do at these prices then they should have just went Conroe, These MacPros are going to get killed by $999 Mom and Pop's PC's from Gateway/HP/Dell.

512MB DDR2 on a $1799 PC in mid 2006 , you gotta be f**kin' kidding me. Jobs must really think you people are stupid.

man I guess I won't even have to OC my E6600 to cream that $2499 machine. This was a stupid move Apple. Pay more for Less.

4God
Jul 14, 2006, 11:00 PM
Power supplies produce a lot of heat. It makes great sense according to simply the most basic laws of thermodynamics.

Could you please explain this basic law of thermodynamics and I mean more extensively than "heat rises."

I always thought that the power supply was on top because of the heat generated by it. Since heat rises, it wouldn't pass over the rest of the computer on its way out. I still agree with you about the weight part though.

Bill the TaxMan

Well since the current G5's have a seperate chamber for the power supply, I guess that wouldn't matter. Also, isn't the air cooler at the bottom than at the already warm top? Go figure....

Silentwave
Jul 14, 2006, 11:06 PM
get perpendicular (http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/research/recording_head/pr/PerpendicularAnimation.html)
AARGH MY EARS!

Whoever came up with that abomination should be SHOT! UGH! they could have put together a nice little slideshow or whatever...but no, they had to make some stupid video with a horrible song i'll NEVER be able to get out of my head!

4God
Jul 14, 2006, 11:07 PM
8 cores?! Wow, maybe one day!

8 cores, yeah you can get that in a jumbled amd setup today.

AidenShaw
Jul 14, 2006, 11:14 PM
OTOH, its been great to finally read the benchmark figures for the new apple processors. It hit me that the mac community will finally have overclocking hardware readily available! Wow!
s/apple/Intel/wh
s/mac community/all the Intel vendors/wh

You have been assimilated.

Apple == Dell == IBM == Gateway == Lenovo == ...

shawnce
Jul 14, 2006, 11:20 PM
AARGH MY EARS!

Whoever came up with that abomination should be SHOT! UGH! they could have put together a nice little slideshow or whatever...but no, they had to make some stupid video with a horrible song i'll NEVER be able to get out of my head!

School House Rock - "Oh, I'm just a bill, a lonely old bill, sitting here on Capitol Hill" (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1569494088/002-8458341-9463244?redirect=true)

Eidorian
Jul 14, 2006, 11:20 PM
Uhhhh Nero Burning ROM does , oops i forgot there is no Nero for Mac just plain TOAST..lol

I just love my Dual 16x NEC ND-3550A's :D ...burn baby burn.

Also if this is the Best Apple can do at these prices then they should have just went Conroe, These MacPros are going to get killed by $999 Mom and Pop's PC's from Gateway/HP/Dell.

512MB DDR2 on a $1799 PC in mid 2006 , you gotta be f**kin' kidding me. Jobs must really think you people are stupid.

man I guess I won't even have to OC my E6600 to cream that $2499 machine. This was a stupid move Apple. Pay more for Less.Yeah, I know that Nero Burning ROM can handle multiple drives. If you have enough CPU power I bet Finder can burn two data DVD's at once. I'm stuck on a lowly G4 800 MHz so I don't want to tax the poor girl.

AidenShaw
Jul 14, 2006, 11:22 PM
top heavy is just idiotic.
Has anyone noticed that three or four disk drives actually weigh a lot more than a power supply?

Especially a modern power supply! (Those Apple IIfx supplies had a lot of iron - but today a 600watt supply is pretty light.)

Get a life (and an IEC 90° cord) and forget whining about power supply top or bottom.

Worrying about "Top heavy" is simply nonsense - I have top PS systems and bottom PS systems, and "top heaviness" has never been an issue - the centre of gravity of my systems is usually determined by the number, capacity, and location of the disks.

ksz
Jul 14, 2006, 11:26 PM
How would you burn two DVDs at once Eldorian? I don't know of any software that lets you do this do you? :confused:

I agree it would be nice. But I can't imagine how.
Here (http://www.ntius.com/default.asp?p=dragonburn/dburn4_main) you go.

Dragon Burn enables Mac desktop and PowerBook notebook computer users to quickly and easily begin producing audio, data, mixed-mode CDs, and DVDs. Dragon Burn's Multi-Burning engine allows users to simultaneously write multiple CDs or DVDs. It also fully supports the newest internal and external drives, including 16x DVD-R drives.

4God
Jul 14, 2006, 11:30 PM
School House Rock - "Oh, I'm just a bill, a lonely old bill, sitting here on Capitol Hill" (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1569494088/002-8458341-9463244?redirect=true)

That's old school. Even I remember that one.

boncellis
Jul 14, 2006, 11:32 PM
School House Rock - "Oh, I'm just a bill, a lonely old bill, sitting here on Capitol Hill" (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1569494088/002-8458341-9463244?redirect=true)

I prefer the Simpsons' parody of that cartoon:

"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."

But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.

Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.

xPismo
Jul 14, 2006, 11:36 PM
s/apple/Intel/wh
s/mac community/all the Intel vendors/wh

You have been assimilated.

Apple == Dell == IBM == Gateway == Lenovo == ...

Apple existed pre RISC, and they will exist post IBM chips. Your fears are unfounded. Well engineered hardware with well engineered software, add a dash of the SJ RDF and things will stay groooooovy.

jephrey
Jul 14, 2006, 11:47 PM
I assume that the PS move is due to heat. That thing generates heat, and if it can vent in a different location or through a different air channel than the processors, the I think that's good... And 2 drive bays is effin spectacular. I myself am fine with 1, but if I can get a bracket and put a couple HDs in that spot then cool. It'd be cool if apple made it usable that way. I would sure like more bays, but just having that real estate for them, and a solution to cleanly mount them would be nice.

Jephrey

aafuss1
Jul 14, 2006, 11:49 PM
All ATI cards-so a Stero 3D capable graphics card BTO. WiMax should be able to be added via a third-party add-on (as 802.11n is still not ready). Wonder if the liquid-cooling will be simpler.

aafuss1
Jul 14, 2006, 11:54 PM
Interesting question, but I don't think any of us here will have the answers.

PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.

As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.

Generic VGA drivers? I'm sure they were developed - they'd be very useful during that time when OS X/Intel was internal-only. But I wouldn't expect them to be bundled with a shipping copy of the system software.

Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.

I agree-eg. to add a Crossfire configuration would mean that Apple would need to have a preference pane to configure that, which they don't-they supply a driver only.

~Shard~
Jul 15, 2006, 12:37 AM
Personally I go the BTO route at Apple.com for my PowerMacs and downgrade all RAM to the minimum cost and buy my RAM from a trusted 3rd party vendor for a savings of at least 10% if not more so.

Exactly - this is one of the reasons I'm glad Apple is going with a minimum RAM configuration. I'd much rather buy RAM from a reputable 3rd party dealer than have to succumb myself to Apple's significant premiums. Always buy 3rd party, never from Apple. :cool:

I agree as I am waiting for the 8 core model with Leopard while I continue to limp along on the Quad G5.

Are you just going to hold out for a Dunnington PowerMac? :p ;)

phatpat88
Jul 15, 2006, 12:40 AM
Burn two DVD's at once and DVD copying.


Burning a DVD while watching another?

Dude, there is totally a use for the power user!

FF_productions
Jul 15, 2006, 12:41 AM
Exactly - this is one of the reasons I'm glad Apple is going with a minimum RAM configuration. I'd much rather buy RAM from a reputable 3rd party dealer than have to succumb myself to Apple's significant premiums. Always buy 3rd party, never from Apple. :cool:


Still, it's ridiculous that Apple's Top-Of-The-Line machines don't come STANDARD with 1 gig of ram. I can guarantee they will when they come out next month. If the MacBook Pro's can come with 1 gig of ram standard, the Mac Pro's will too. I cannot wait to see this new Mac Pro, it's new design, it's new everything. I'm getting that countdown widget...
Ok, I just got it
http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/developer/wwdc2006countdown.html

phatpat88
Jul 15, 2006, 12:43 AM
So excited... How come no FW800 infront? thats a little crazy no?


Right now the only device I use for FW800 are Hard drives... I would rather have a 2nd USB 2.0 in front than the 800

phatpat88
Jul 15, 2006, 12:46 AM
What about 4 SATA II Drives? This way I can have a mirrored 1TB RAID [clicks heals]

The speed of a RAID with the security of mirroring.. it doesn't get mucho better :)

~Shard~
Jul 15, 2006, 12:49 AM
Still, it's ridiculous that Apple's Top-Of-The-Line machines don't come STANDARD with 1 gig of ram. I can guarantee they will when they come out next month.

Oh, I agree - I should hope this is the case. In this day and age, 1 GB should be table stakes, especially when you're dealing with Pro machines - I would bet that most PowerMac owners upgrade to at least 2 GB of RAM standard as it is. Throw on top of that the fact that Leopard is coming out in (presumably) 6 months, give or take, and I'm sure that 1 GB will be required to run that with any degree of smoothness as well.

Here's hoping you're right. I think including 512 MB of RAM standard would be a bit of a slap in the face if Apple is releasing these supposedly "advanced" machines. What kind of advanced PowerMac has only 512 MB of RAM standard? ;) :cool:

FF_productions
Jul 15, 2006, 12:54 AM
Here's hoping you're right. I think including 512 MB of RAM standard would be a bit of a slap in the face if Apple is releasing these supposedly "advanced" machines. What kind of advanced PowerMac has only 512 MB of RAM standard? ;) :cool:

It would be ridiculous if it came with just 512 mb's of ram...

Steve Jobs-"The New Octa-Core Mac Pro with 512 mb's of ram" It just doesn't fit...

~Shard~
Jul 15, 2006, 12:58 AM
It would be ridiculous if it came with just 512 mb's of ram...

Steve Jobs-"The New Octa-Core Mac Pro with 512 mb's of ram" It just doesn't fit...

I agree, it wouldn't make sense. Might as well sell a new Lamborghini with a 1.8L 4-banger... ;)

Silentwave
Jul 15, 2006, 01:10 AM
It would be ridiculous if it came with just 512 mb's of ram...

Steve Jobs-"The New Octa-Core Mac Pro with 512 mb's of ram" It just doesn't fit...

I honestly think it'll have 1GB standard- they can save money by not having to bother with FB-DIMM 512s. its cheaper to just get 1 and 2 gig increments.

Silentwave
Jul 15, 2006, 01:12 AM
What about 4 SATA II Drives? This way I can have a mirrored 1TB RAID [clicks heals]

The speed of a RAID with the security of mirroring.. it doesn't get mucho better :)

You mean SATA 3Gbps? Sata II is often confused with Sata 3Gbps and has not been brought to market yet, unfortunately. the sata people even have a page explaining the difference on their site :confused: . the good part though is they're planning 6Gbps and IIRC 12 as well.

I want sata3g or SAS or both.

baeder
Jul 15, 2006, 01:19 AM
Is it possible that the lower end models (rumored to be single processor) will be upgradeable by BTO or later on by the user by putting in another processor?

FF_productions
Jul 15, 2006, 01:30 AM
Is it possible that the lower end models (rumored to be single processor) will be upgradeable by BTO or later on by the user by putting in another processor?

Depends on how it is built, I'm sure you will be able to though. I know just as much as you.

DrGruv1
Jul 15, 2006, 01:43 AM
Maybe along the line of the g4 quicksilver (without the handles)

a nice short compact apple tower with more expansion than the mini and with a conroe for....

$1099

Now you'd be talkin' :)

let people switch out their monitors, etc and give them a nice tower - not the stupid mini :) - i say (stupid mini) only because i wish it was a smallish tower with expansion capabilities :)

Shagrat
Jul 15, 2006, 02:00 AM
Here (http://www.ntius.com/default.asp?p=dragonburn/dburn4_main) you go.

(re Dragon burn...)

looks like a good app, and the price is good, but it seems as if it is for PPC mac only if their downloadable manual is to be believed. Anybody know if there is a Universal binary in the offing? Need a burn program for my (Non-Mooing!) Macbook!

Marx55
Jul 15, 2006, 02:23 AM
My top 10 features (in order of preference).

1. Quiet Mac. THAT IS A MUST. If possible, no fans.
2. Modular Mac. Use any Apple cinema display with it.
3. Fast 7,200 rpm drive inside. NO SLOW DRIVES!
4. At least a maximum of 2 GB RAM (BTO).
5. FireWire 800 (2), 400 (2), USB 2 (6) and eSATA (2).
6. True 64-bit microprocessor inside.
7. True Intel virtualization microprocessor inside.
8. Two Blu-ray drives built-in (at least as a BTO).
9. Upgradeable microprocessor inside.
10. Reasonably priced. Check out current PC boxes!

Silentwave
Jul 15, 2006, 03:29 AM
10. Reasonably priced. Check out current PC boxes!

You know the more I think about it the more I question Apple's ability to make anything with a Xeon particularly cheap. I've been pricing all sorts of Dell workstations with the 5100 series Xeon-Woodcrest cores... even the single chip versions are not cheap. Granted, they may have inflated prices due to targeting at the large business market, but still they wouldn't be cheap. We'll see, but the more I think about it maybe we will see Conroe at the low end.

illegalprelude
Jul 15, 2006, 04:12 AM
Not a chance in the near future. Blu Ray and Sony are in utter shambles right now.

really? off what fact is this based upon or personal opinion? :rolleyes:

svenas1
Jul 15, 2006, 04:55 AM
The thing that perplexes me is the relocation of the Power Supply to the top. This is either bogus info or they know something they aren't letting on about all the Liquid Cooling problems that have been arising lately in the repair world.
Plus would this not put a strain on the power cord since the cord would have its own weight hanging down on it instead of how it currently comes out of the back of the tower and immediately lays on the floor or desk surface? Something's fishy about this.

what if the plug is still at the bottom, and the connection to the actual power unit is internal? high voltage connection through the case innards - is that possible ?

Multimedia
Jul 15, 2006, 05:02 AM
Here's Link To NTI Dragon Burn for Mac OS X (http://www.ntius.com/default.asp?p=dragonburn/dburn4_main).

Dragon Burn enables Mac desktop and PowerBook notebook computer users to quickly and easily begin producing audio, data, mixed-mode CDs, and DVDs. Dragon Burn's Multi-Burning engine allows users to simultaneously write multiple CDs or DVDs. It also fully supports the newest internal and external drives, including 16x DVD-R drives.Thanks ksz. I checked it out and the multi burning capability is great. But Dragon Burn will not let you write Images which I find incredibly lame. I use Toast 7 a lot and I use it most of the time to write images not to physically burn discs. I would love to be able to write multiple Images with something. But, alas, Dragon Burn is not it. :(http://www.creativemac.com/2001/04_apr/news/toast53.htm

Still, from what I've read you need multiple instances of Toast open. I'll try Disk Utility for burning two images at once when I get a new image that I need to burn.Wow. I had no idea I could have multiple copies of Toast 7 open. Just made a dupe and it works! Thanks Eldorian. I can really push my Quad to further limits now that I know this. Mucho Gracias.

Eidorian
Jul 15, 2006, 05:14 AM
Thanks ksz. I checked it out and the multi burning capability is great. But Dragon Burn will not let you write Images which I find incredibly lame. I use Toast 7 a lot and I use it most of the time to write images not to physically burn discs. I would love to be able to write multiple Images with something. But, alas, Dragon Burn is not it. :(http://www.creativemac.com/2001/04_apr/news/toast53.htm

Still, from what I've read you need multiple instances of Toast open. I'll try Disk Utility for burning two images at once when I get a new image that I need to burn.

Multimedia
Jul 15, 2006, 05:15 AM
I prefer the Simpsons' parody of that cartoon:

"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."

But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.

Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.We have that already on the Refurbished page. :) Dual Core 2GHz G5 is only $1699 there. Quad only $2799. So your dream of $1499 will come when the 2GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Pro hits the refurb page - which, according to recent history, should happen before Christmas.I believe that the MacBook was on the refurb page in around 3-4 weeks. The iMac Core Duo took AGES though.Yes MacBook broke the speed record for shift to the refurb page in record time. Right now everything is up there except the 17" MacBook Pros. My Quad made it there in only 3 months last Winter.

Eidorian
Jul 15, 2006, 05:18 AM
We have that already on the Refurbished page. :) Dual Core 2GHz G5 is only $1699 there. Quad only $2799. So your dream of $1499 will come when the 2GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Pro hits the refurb page - which, according to recent history, should happen before Christmas.I believe that the MacBook was on the refurb page in around 3-4 weeks. The iMac Core Duo took AGES though.

Squire
Jul 15, 2006, 06:10 AM
For what it's worth, Alienware's top-of-the-line ALX series desktops (actually, all of their desktops, I believe) have the power supply at the top, too. I know some will scoff but they are lauded for their gaming performance and they brag about their cooling technology.

-Squire

spinko
Jul 15, 2006, 06:25 AM
For what it's worth, Alienware's top-of-the-line ALX series desktops (actually, all of their desktops, I believe) have the power supply at the top, too. I know some will scoff but they are lauded for their gaming performance and they brag about their cooling technology.

-Squire

well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise.. :-)

ictiosapiens
Jul 15, 2006, 06:31 AM
Man if they put the power supply on the top that would just be insanely stupid. 2 Optical drives is fine by me, although I am good with just one. But the post above about a Blu-Ray drive would make having 2 logical, one is Blue-ray, other is DVD/CD +/- RW.

-mark

Why is it stupid to put the psu on the top? as far as I'm aware heat rises(the psu produces quite a bit of heat regardless of processor load, so constant heat), so it would be the sensible thing to have done if they still had heat issues... Only because pcs are like this, it doesn't make it a bad idea...

edit: sorry, I hadn't reached that last post...

topgunn
Jul 15, 2006, 06:35 AM
The Power Mac G5 power supply is in the bottom but it is also isolated from the rest of the case so that the heat doesn't rise through all of the other zones. I prefer the power supply at the bottom. If it is indeed at the top, they will have relocated the hard drives. Hopefully they will be put into the bottom where we can fit 4-8 hard drives.

jaxstate
Jul 15, 2006, 07:59 AM
A real mess? That's one fine looking machine. IMO
well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise.. :-)

Squire
Jul 15, 2006, 08:12 AM
A real mess? That's one fine looking machine. IMO

Yeah, I wish I had the 4 grand to buy one. I guess that's one of the reasons I can't get too excited about these (rumored) new machines. No way in hell I'll be able to afford one. No...no way in hell I'll be able to justify spending that much on a computer (Read: "I'd like to but I have a wife and I would never be able to convince her." BTW, how's life, ~Shard~? :D)

Again, as millions of other MacRumors members have pointed out, a cheap Mac Pro would rock. But, alas... <Sigh>

-Squire

50548
Jul 15, 2006, 08:15 AM
well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise.. :-)

Looks like a real mess, indeed...and the PC-clone industry continues with its "leading-edge" case designs and cooling techniques...may I have another Apple, please? :rolleyes:

generik
Jul 15, 2006, 08:21 AM
1. Notice the power plug hole at the top? Now imagine a cord running out of it. Yup, there is a reason why Apple has put it at the bottom.

2. Top heavy.

There are advantages to having it on top too.

1) Hot air from components in the case rises to the top of the case..
2) Fan in PSU vents it out of system

NoNameBrand
Jul 15, 2006, 08:49 AM
There are advantages to having it on top too.

1) Hot air from components in the case rises to the top of the case..
2) Fan in PSU vents it out of system

Hot air in my G5, at least, is vented out the back. There's not a lot of air flow between the thermal zones on the G5.

jaxstate
Jul 15, 2006, 08:53 AM
I'm really wondering how low the low end will be. I have no need for a new intel MacPro, but I do wonder how this will affect the prices of the G5s that will be left in inventory. Wonder will we see a big price drop. Didn't happen with the notebooks, but one can dream.


Has there been any news on new displays?

spinko
Jul 15, 2006, 08:59 AM
A real mess? That's one fine looking machine. IMO

compared to this, yes.

Dont Hurt Me
Jul 15, 2006, 09:30 AM
well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise.. :-)Not really a mess but not anywhere near quicksilvers ease of use but still holds a ton of optical and a ton of hard drives. Apples Powermac G5 series are kind of pathetic in this respect.

Im still hoping apple throws away the radiator and go back to something Quicksilver like.

guzhogi
Jul 15, 2006, 09:58 AM
I kind of miss the B&W G3 and the Power Mac G4's enclusure where all you needed to do to open it was lift the latch and open it and ¡voila! All the components right there! W/ the G5/ you have to take off the side and isn't there a clear side panel you have to take off, too?

guzhogi
Jul 15, 2006, 10:03 AM
I also wish Apple used standard ATX power supplies. That way, if you need a new power suply, you can get one from your local electronics store. I don't know if Apple already uses them, but I have a beige desktop G3 and the power supply on it is getting old and I have a bunch of extra stuff in it and the power supply can't handle it all. I've been told I can get one from a b&w G3, but going to a best buy or where ever and getting a new one I think would be a lot easier.

Mammoth
Jul 15, 2006, 10:14 AM
Looking at PC product offerings by ATI (http://www.ati.com/products/workstation/fireglmatrix.html), you can see that they also offer video cards with two dual-link DVI ports on a single card. You can even get this on a Radeon X1900 series card (http://www.ati.com/products/radeonx1900/radeonx1900xtx/specs.html).
I believe you are wrong (http://www.ati.com/designpartners/media/images/RX1900_Board_lg.jpg).
(Believe)

~Shard~
Jul 15, 2006, 10:20 AM
BTW, how's life, ~Shard~? :D

Life's great, no complaints whatsoever. :)

I also wish Apple used standard ATX power supplies. That way, if you need a new power suply, you can get one from your local electronics store.

That would be nice as well. It would definitely increase the longevity of the Mac, since if you ever wanted to upgrade the P/S, or if it blew, it would be a lot easier to do so. Still possible the way it is of course, but this would probably result in less hassle.

Evangelion
Jul 15, 2006, 10:32 AM
Power Supply at the top is REALLY stupid.

Why?

Because PC's have the PSU at the top, so it MUST be bad.

Evangelion
Jul 15, 2006, 10:37 AM
1) This is all rumour and speculation...
2) At the price that OEMs charge for memory, less RAM is better. We can fill it with whatever we pick.

Let's see.... If I could choose between two identical compter, one having 512MB of RAM and costing $1799, and the other having 1GB of RAM and costing $1799, I should buy the one with less RAM because then I could "pick my own RAM"?

And do I have to remind you that Woodcrests use FB-DIMM RAM, and those aren't really available that widely yet.

kevin.rivers
Jul 15, 2006, 10:44 AM
Life's great, no complaints whatsoever. :)



That would be nice as well. It would definitely increase the longevity of the Mac, since if you ever wanted to upgrade the P/S, or if it blew, it would be a lot easier to do so. Still possible the way it is of course, but this would probably result in less hassle.

I disagree. Using ATX power supplies is a stupid idea. I am sure Apple uses higher quality power supplies than you would pick up at your local CompUSA.

If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.

Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.

This would cause too many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.

~Shard~
Jul 15, 2006, 10:49 AM
I disagree. Using ATX power supplies is a stupid idea. I am sure Apple uses higher quality power supplies than you would pick up at your local CompUSA.

If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.

Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.

This would cause to many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.

Actually that is a good point. Another good example is how some people install incorrect RAM into their Mac - they just pick up generic cheapo RAM, not Mac-certified, and wonder why they have all sorts of issues.

Timepass
Jul 15, 2006, 10:57 AM
I disagree. Using ATX power supplies is a stupid idea. I am sure Apple uses higher quality power supplies than you would pick up at your local CompUSA.

If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.

Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.

This would cause too many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.

Well I wouldnt worry about that in the case of a mac. Only people who are really going to replace there PSU are going to be people who know something about computers. A lot of people replace there ram. PSU are not upgraded very offen if ever at all.

Also the people who do replace PSU most of them know dont cheap out on them. Among home builder comminty a thing most agree on is NEVER cheap out on a PSU. Go name brand. Reason being is why would you build a 1k system and then risk it all with a cheap PSU (rule can be cut if pretty much using dirt cheap parts to begin with and trying to go as cheaply as possible (less than 500 and in old spare parts). My own PC rig using an Antec True Power PSU in it (that i pick up from compUSA oddly enough).

I think going ATX is a good thing because it means Apple is going to be using more standardized parts so it will be cheaper for apple to get them.

~Shard~
Jul 15, 2006, 10:59 AM
Well I wouldnt worry about that in the case of a mac. Only people who are really going to replace there PSU are going to be people who know something about computers. A lot of people replace there ram. PSU are not upgraded very offen if ever at all.

Also the people who do replace PSU most of them know dont cheap out on them. Among home builder comminty a thing most agree on is NEVER cheap out on a PSU. Go name brand. Reason being is why would you build a 1k system and then risk it all with a cheap PSU (rule can be cut if pretty much using dirt cheap parts to begin with and trying to go as cheaply as possible (less than 500 and in old spare parts). My own PC rig using an Antec True Power PSU in it (that i pick up from compUSA oddly enough).

I think going ATX is a good thing because it means Apple is going to be using more standardized parts so it will be cheaper for apple to get them.

And another good point! ;) Yeah, you would hope that if someone is replacing their PSU they know what they're doing... it is different from a Joe User simply installing some RAM.

cgc
Jul 15, 2006, 11:05 AM
:o well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise.. :-)
I think placing the PSU at the bottom of the case is good...heavy items near the top of the case may lead to Macs being prone to tipping over. Heat can be vented easy enough...

Timepass
Jul 15, 2006, 11:18 AM
:o
I think placing the PSU at the bottom of the case is good...heavy items near the top of the case may lead to Macs being prone to tipping over. Heat can be vented easy enough...


Come on PSU do are not that heavy and genenally speaking cases are pretty stable. Putting the PSU at the top, oh dang the computer will tip over with 1 inch of less travel. It a Tower that going to be out of the way and not hit that offen. Come on PC have been built for years with PSU at the top. Are they unstable... No they are fairly stable. Considering 95+% of all PC towers out there have the PSU at the top and are they tipping over at a slight hit.. No. you have to tip them pretty far before they will fall over.

Also there are other advatages of putting the PSU at the top. Instead of having to make another fan system to cool it and keep it separated from the rest of the case due to the heat it generatates you can now put it at the top where it not going to add heat to the case and use the PSU fans to help cool the rest of the computer.

Lets see that means less fans are needed over all in the computer which means Oh my gosh. LESS NOISE. <sarcasim>Is that possible. Using a PSU fans to help cool the entire computer...... Who as ever heard of such a thing. <sarcasim> Really people most of the agurments people are using against putting the PSU at the top are stupid and weak at best.

It WILL NOT make the computer top heavy. The base on computer is wide enough to keep it stable any how.

It WILL NOT add any more noise to the computer (it will reduce it because the PSU can now help cool the case with it own cooling fans as well)

Power plug at the top.. Um yeah not really a problem. Oh dang a wire is not 12 in higher than it was before. it is still on the back. and instead of plugging in you monitor at the top of the case and the plug on the bottom they flip locations. You the user will never notices or care.

guzhogi
Jul 15, 2006, 11:20 AM
Something I liked about the power supply in my beige G3 was that not only did it have a power in socket, but allso a power out one too to a monitor or something.

wizz0bang
Jul 15, 2006, 11:25 AM
I like your line of thinking. You know, what if Apple just released 4 Mac Pro models? Or offered 2 Mac Pro models and 2 iMac Pro models. The bottom two could have Conroe chips and the top two could have 2 x Woodcrest chips. Perhaps have an ever so slight case design difference between the two (i.e. slightly smaller on the low end or charcoal black on the upper end). Because, when you think of it, "prosumers" who already own a display are faced with a difficult buying decision with the current lineup.


That would be a good lineup: two Minis, two iMacs, two Macs, two MacPros. Perhaps then the spread from $1499 for a base model conroe Mac to a $3299 or even $3599 for a premo dual-woodcrest 3GHz MacPro would seem plausible? I really like having a Mac desktop option before stepping up to the MacPro (with a smaller format). Right now the iMac is your only option in a certain range.

I agree with another poster too, having both models silent would be most excellent!

bigjohn
Jul 15, 2006, 12:06 PM
Really, Apple has always been truly at the back of the back when it comes to optical drives. My money says that if there are two optical drive - one is a CD-R and one is a DVD-RAM.

Also, 1GB of RAM, who are they kidding? More like Mac Amateur

cgmpowers
Jul 15, 2006, 12:24 PM
Has anyone considered this as to why Apple 'maybe' including two optical drives? We have external lightscribe 'superdrives' from Lacie (and others) but haven't seen one by Apple yet. That'd be a nice feature. So that's the first drive. The second optical drive is probably that BlueRay drive (massive storage capability compared to the other optical drive, and probably NOT capable of Lightscribing).

Other thoughts, I do agree it'd be nice to have four bays for hard drives but hard drive sizes are increasing again. I'd be very happy with two 500 or 600 gb hard drives (which is what I'll be ordering).

1 GB of ram min. is a must, I'm opting for at least 4 GB.

I also don't care if its 2.66 Ghz or 3.00 Ghz as long as its a quad (two dual core).. I just need an Intel MacPro soon.. My G4 1ghz machines are SO MUCH showing its age..

gekko513
Jul 15, 2006, 12:27 PM
Also, 1GB of RAM, who are they kidding? More like Mac Amateur
Many prefer to buy their own RAM because it's usually cheaper. There would be more people crying if Apple bundled 2GB of expensive RAM. They could offer a RAM downgrade of course, but then why not just give the price of the downgraded version, which leaves us at square one again.

jiggie2g
Jul 15, 2006, 01:08 PM
The only reason I see Apple going all Woodcrest is to justify their high markups , while insulting you Mac Loyalist on price they also offer you less performance for your money.

Look here at the current woody pricing at Newegg

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?Submit=ENE&N=50001157+2010340343+1050922423&Subcategory=343&description=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=

So apple is going to charge you guys $1799 for a Desktop with a 2.0ghz CPU , when everyone else will charge $1199 for a Conroe E6600 2.4ghz based desktop.

This is not looking good apple.

gekko513
Jul 15, 2006, 01:24 PM
The only reason I see Apple going all Woodcrest is to justify their high markups , while insulting you Mac Loyalist on price they also offer you less performance for your money.

Look here at the current woody pricing at Newegg

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?Submit=ENE&N=50001157+2010340343+1050922423&Subcategory=343&description=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=

So apple is going to charge you guys $1799 for a Desktop with a 2.0ghz CPU , when everyone else will charge $1199 for a Conroe E6600 2.4ghz based desktop.

This is not looking good apple.
There's a good point here, but it's not the one you're pointing at. If Apple continues as they have with the PowerMac pricing, the Mac Pro will not be an insult if you compare it to Dells, HP and other vendors' pro offerings. Historically they have all been at very comparable price levels for comparable products. There are other differences between the lines than GHz. Quality standards for the pro/expensive lines are higher than for the consumer line, for one thing.

The point is that Apple doesn't have an option for potential buyers that want a high performance, customisable and upgradable consumer level product (not all-in-one). There are no Apple product to compare those $1199 Conroe PCs to. The closest thing is the iMac.

50548
Jul 15, 2006, 01:28 PM
That would be a good lineup: two Minis, two iMacs, two Macs, two MacPros. Perhaps then the spread from $1499 for a base model conroe Mac to a $3299 or even $3599 for a premo dual-woodcrest 3GHz MacPro would seem plausible? I really like having a Mac desktop option before stepping up to the MacPro (with a smaller format). Right now the iMac is your only option in a certain range.

I agree with another poster too, having both models silent would be most excellent!

This sounds to me like a redux of the Performa/Quadra/LC disaster of the late 90s...I am glad Apple has learned from its mistakes, so it does NOT stretch its production line to a plethora of unnecessary models anymore...

A cheapo MacPro model is more than enough to fill any gaps between the iMac and the Pro line...nothing else.

~Shard~
Jul 15, 2006, 01:31 PM
The point is that Apple doesn't have an option for potential buyers that want a high performance, customisable and upgradable consumer level product (not all-in-one). There are no Apple product to compare those $1199 Conroe PCs to. The closest thing is the iMac.

Exactly. As I said above, a PowerMac is overkill (on both price and power) for many users. The iMac might suit their needs from this perspective, however many people do not like the fact that they are not upgradeable (apart from the RAM). What if I want a larger HDD in my iMac? What if I want two HDDs? What if I want to swap in a new burner? What if the HDD fails? It would be nice to pop a new one in, not have to buy a whole new machine. And then there's the display. If the HDD goes, as in my example above, how many people would like to throw away that nice 20" display which still works perfectly? Or, vice versa, what if the display goes? The rest of the computer is perfectly fine...

A Conroe mini-tower would be perfect for many people. The gap between Mac mini/iMac and PowerMac is simply too large for many people. :cool:

JGowan
Jul 15, 2006, 02:09 PM
Man if they put the power supply on the top that would just be insanely stupid.-markThat's just some guy's rendition who knows a little about Adobe software. Certainly not Jonathan Ive's work, nor will remotely look like that.

Anonymous Freak
Jul 15, 2006, 02:16 PM
Can anyone tell me the purpose of dual drive slots nowadays? I can see the use for them (and had computers with) when they were limited to one function, i.e. DVD-ROM for one and a CD-RW for the other but now that everything can happen in one drive with speed not being an issue, is it really nececcary to have two?

Early Blu-Ray burners can't read or write CDs, and are slow at DVDs. Maybe we'll see a Blu-Ray burner and a high-speed DVD±R(W)/CD-R(W).

^squirrel^
Jul 15, 2006, 02:21 PM
Good: Dual-Core 2GHz Intel Xeon, 512MB DDR 667, ATI Radeon X1600 Pro, 250GB Hard Drive,$1799
Better: Dual-Core 2.33GHz Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $2499
Best: Two Dual-Core 2.66 Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $3299

I wonder if i'll be able to upgrade to the X1900?

Anonymous Freak
Jul 15, 2006, 02:22 PM
You mean like how the MacBook Pro was 2.0 GHz at the top end on release?

I have a feeling if 2.66 is the top-end 'stock' model, it will be upgradeable to 3.0 GHz as a user-configurable option, much the way the MacBook Pro was at 2.0 GHz upgradeable to 2.16 GHz.

With SPEC benchmarks showing The 3.0 GHz Woodcrest as the absolute fastest processor on the market for both floating point and integer (it has a 50% lead over the second-place integer chip!) it's a good bet Apple will offer it, at least as an option.

I'm actually truly excited about a processor launch. The last time was the G5 intro. (Before that, it was the original PowerPC introduction.)

[G5]Hydra
Jul 15, 2006, 04:23 PM
Early Blu-Ray burners can't read or write CDs, and are slow at DVDs. Maybe we'll see a Blu-Ray burner and a high-speed DVD±R(W)/CD-R(W).

Exactly right. Apple seems cozy with Pioneer, they did debut the original Superdrive in a PowerMac remember, and Pioneer's BDR-101A Blu-ray burner can't read or write CDs. Dual opticals would have nothing to do with Apple wanting to make people copy discs or doing anything made simple with two opticals. Pioneer debuted the BDR-101A (http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,125581,00.asp) a few months ago at $1000 retail and if Apple gets a nice discount to use them they would need to go with an additional drive to be able to do CD's.

-Jerry C.

Silentwave
Jul 15, 2006, 04:26 PM
The only reason I see Apple going all Woodcrest is to justify their high markups , while insulting you Mac Loyalist on price they also offer you less performance for your money.

Look here at the current woody pricing at Newegg

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?Submit=ENE&N=50001157+2010340343+1050922423&Subcategory=343&description=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=

So apple is going to charge you guys $1799 for a Desktop with a 2.0ghz CPU , when everyone else will charge $1199 for a Conroe E6600 2.4ghz based desktop.

This is not looking good apple.

You can be quiet now. Go on Dell's medium/large business site, which is the *only* section you can find the Woodcrests in single/dual configs (HP doesn't have theirs out yet), and configure one with a decent video card, 250GB HD, no monitor, and any of the rumored processor configurations (which I think some are not correct), a DL DVD+/-RW burner, and optical mouse and you tell ME how much it costs.

kevin.rivers
Jul 15, 2006, 04:42 PM
You can be quiet now. Go on Dell's medium/large business site, which is the *only* section you can find the Woodcrests in single/dual configs (HP doesn't have theirs out yet), and configure one with a decent video card, 250GB HD, no monitor, and any of the rumored processor configurations (which I think some are not correct), a DL DVD+/-RW burner, and optical mouse and you tell ME how much it costs.

I will tell you how much... Very Expensive.

I must say it boils my blood to read some of the ignorant posts on here. Give me the top parts in a small box, all for $999.

Jiggie2g, your assumptions are way off. I configured the Dell Silentwave mentioned with:

One 5130
1GB DDR2 667
250GB HD
DVD+/-RW burner

price: $2983

Far from $1199. Oh but wait, you pulled a good move. Talking about woodcrest systems and giving a theoretical pricing for a Conroe system. Nice move. ;)

Anyway. Us loyalist Mac buyers are fully aware of current pricing and when price and specs are announced we will make a decision to buy or not to buy. I doubt Apple insults us. Maybe you, even when the data puts the pricing in the same spectrum, you will buy Dell anyway to make yourself feel good. Cheers.

sonnys
Jul 15, 2006, 05:04 PM
Too many people are complaining about rumored information that isn't even reliable, and most likely incorrect.

I think we can look at what Apple has done with its other lineups this past year as a guide to the future. Based on what we've seen, I don't think Apple will be redesigning the Mac Pro case -- it's large enough to accommodate anything they wish to throw in there. I also think it's a great industrial design, physically alluding to the power within.

The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?

Great new technologies always made their way to the Power Macs first, and then trickled down the line. I have every faith that the Mac Pro will continue this tradition, especially since the Mac Pro will be competing with other high-end Xeon workstations. Apple will need something in the Mac Pro that nobody else has, and it will also need to utilize Intel's fastest chips in order to dispel any notions of the system being weaker than the competition in terms of speed -- this is a dark cloud over the Mac that finally needs to be cleared.

Having two optical drives makes sense if one of the drives is going to be BluRay -- isn't BluRay incompatible with writing DVD and HD-DVD content? It would make sense if one of the drives was BluRay, the other was HD-DVD, giving Mac Pro users access to the full spectrum of DVD authoring hardware. If two optical bays are provided, I believe this type of configuration will be offered.

I'll be watching the announcement closely, although my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 (single core) handles everything I throw at it and has never ever given me reason to even want to upgrade. However, if the new Mac Pro hits 3 GHz I may be very tempted... if it doesn't, I'll wait it out. If the new high end Mac Pro doesn't go to 3 GHz like Dell and others, the Mac Pro will sink plenty fast.

Multimedia
Jul 15, 2006, 05:22 PM
Too many people are complaining about rumored information that isn't even reliable, and most likely incorrect.

I think we can look at what Apple has done with its other lineups this past year as a guide to the future. Based on what we've seen, I don't think Apple will be redesigning the Mac Pro case -- it's large enough to accommodate anything they wish to throw in there. I also think it's a great industrial design, physically alluding to the power within.

The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?

I'll be watching the announcement closely, although my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 (single core) handles everything I throw at it and has never ever given me reason to even want to upgrade. However, if the new Mac Pro hits 3 GHz I may be very tempted... if it doesn't, I'll wait it out. If the new high end Mac Pro doesn't go to 3 GHz like Dell and others, the Mac Pro will sink plenty fast.Well my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 was easily brought to it's knees once I started simultaneously recording EyeTV, Encoding DVD Images and Ripping MP4s from those Images. Thank GOD the Quad went refurb in early February and I was able to sell your model for $2500.

In any event, I think we are all grasping at straws for the next three weeks waiting for Monday morning August 7. :confused: I'm sure there will be some sort of surprise. But I have no idea what that surprise will be. I'll be glad when it's over since we'll all be able to see much more clearly how the next year will be looking.

cgc
Jul 15, 2006, 05:24 PM
...Putting the PSU at the top, oh dang the computer will tip over with 1 inch of less travel...

...Really people most of the agurments people are using against putting the PSU at the top are stupid and weak at best...

...It WILL NOT make the computer top heavy. The base on computer is wide enough to keep it stable any how...


I was not arguing for or against PSUs at top or bottom, I was simply trying to throw one simple point out: that a 300W PSU which weighs between 2 and 4 lbs would bring the top weight up slightly. I'm not saying it will make Macs tip. I'm sure Apple has considered distributing the weight to ensure their towers are stable, especially since they have one of the largest towers on the market in the G5.

BTW, no need to be so sarcastic and have such a bad attitude.

Silentwave
Jul 15, 2006, 05:55 PM
Too many people are complaining about rumored information that isn't even reliable, and most likely incorrect.

I agree with you whole-heartedly!

The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?

Great new technologies always made their way to the Power Macs first, and then trickled down the line. I have every faith that the Mac Pro will continue this tradition, especially since the Mac Pro will be competing with other high-end Xeon workstations. Apple will need something in the Mac Pro that nobody else has, and it will also need to utilize Intel's fastest chips in order to dispel any notions of the system being weaker than the competition in terms of speed -- this is a dark cloud over the Mac that finally needs to be cleared.

You hit the nail right on the head with the processor availability. Core Duo uses the pentium M architecture and was only in two versions: mobile, codename Yonah with its variants, and a pair of low speed ultra low power server chips- Sossaman- only going up to 2GHz with 2MB L2 and 667 FSB. the other Xeons (Paxville/Dempsey) and high end chips like the Pentium D/Pentium Extreme Edition ( Smithfield/Presler) are all using NetBurst architecutre, which is obsolete and very inefficient plus they are extremely power hungry and hot.The top Pentium Extreme Edition Presler dual core at 3.73GHz was easily outperformed by several of the Conroe cores- I recall one test where it was neck and neck with the 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo.

They wanted the fastest chips possible using the best architecture possible- that is Woodcrest and Conroe with the Core microarchitecture.

I have little doubt that the 3GHz Xeon 5160 will be in the Mac Pros, if not standard, then as a BTO option.

Squire
Jul 15, 2006, 06:29 PM
The gap between Mac mini/iMac and PowerMac is simply too large for many people. :cool:

You could even take it a step further and say that the gap between the Mac mini and the (rumored) Mac Pro is too large. Why exclude the iMac? Well, for the consumer with a nice 20" LCD on his/her desk, the iMac is simply not an option.

Give us a Conroe-based tower, please. They could even keep the same basic case design across the board. Call the upper end ones "Mac Pro Extreme" or something. (I like the idea of offering a black anodized aluminum case to differentiate between Conroe- and Woodcrest-based systems.)

-Squire