We've seen the new mini enclosure... thoughts on potential Mac Pro redesign...?

[anim8or]

Hello fellow Mac Pro users/fans/etc....

So we have all been waiting on the edge of our seats for months now for an update to the Mac Pro...

..and after all the bickering that has gone on in the forums and threads here on MacRumors i thought i would start a thread for some fun and hopefully sensible insight into a potential redesign.

How would apple be able to pull of a unibody case?
Will they keep or get rid of the handles?
Will they keep or get rid of side access?

Lets discuss...

[Ravich]

The Mac Mighty. 2.5'' hard drive bays, laptop RAM and GPU.

[telequest]

The Mac Pro is really an anomaly among Apple products. It's the only one where raw power (and expandability) is the main issue. Apple doesn't focus on (and sometimes conceals) the tech specs of the iPhone and iPad. And raw power takes a back seat for most Macs - where they talk mainly about design, the display, weight, hipness, etc.

But the Mac Pro is a truck. At least for those of us who use its power to drive heavy loads that weaker models can't handle. What matters is what's under the hood. I really couldn't care less about external design changes unless they somehow improve function.

If the new 2010s (and beyond) look just like my 2004 G5 Power Mac, I'll be just fine with that. I suppose others will welcome some cool new look. But for me, it's not something that I would want Apple to spend a whole lot of time delaying updates for.

[nanofrog]

How would apple be able to pull of a unibody case?
Cast out the basic shape in aluminum, then machine it to the final product (i.e. think thick sided box without one side).

Will they keep or get rid of the handles?
I hope they toss them, as that could actually allow for additional internal space for drives that users' have clambored for, as well as give more design choices for future boards (i.e. allow things like RAM slots to be of sufficient quantity to keep up with other board offerings).

Will they keep or get rid of side access?
Keep it, as it's the most logical way to obtain entry to the system (clean too).

[J the Ninja]

One thing I'd like is a magnetically-attatching side panel, instead of pins. Apple seems to be on a magnet-trip these last few years, so I wouldn't be surprised if they do it. IMO, the handles have become a trademark of Apple workstations. They go back to....what...the blue and white G3? That was nearly 11 years ago. It's tradition. It just wouldn't be a truck-Mac without them. And besides, not only do they help with carrying it (or at least lifting it up to get your arms around the bottom), the lower ones help elevate it so it sucks up less dust.

I kinda like the angled-out handles on the G3 and G4 machines, as opposed to the straight ones the cheesegrater. I think a new cheesegrater, with angled-out handles, more tapered corners, and a magnetic side panel would be cool. Also, switch the power LED to the behind-the-aluminum style they brought in with the MBPs (do the current iMacs and Minis use it too?) And use the new anodized aluminum power switch, rather than the shiny one. And make the new one wider so we can get the heatsinks AND 12 RAM slots in there.

[VirtualRain]

There are a few things Apple could do, from least extreme to most extreme...

- Change the Apple logo on the side to black, perhaps even using a plastic insert that would enable them to place the wifi and BT antennas there for better wireless performance

- Change the optical drives to slot-loading

- Remove the handles

- Extend the size of the chassis in either dimension. Increasing height to accommodate more drive bays or increasing the width or depth to accommodate more RAM slots on the CPU tray

- Change the chassis to a cube form factor. Although expensive, this could really get people excited about a Mac Pro again and reduce the "truck" like stigma of it.

Having said all this, I would never have predicted what they were able to do with the Mini... esp. integrating the PSU into the chassis while making it half the size! So likely Apple will surprise us, IF they decide to do anything with the case.

Also, it's worth noting that a case redesign would most likely be accompanied by an increase in price. The Mac Mini base config jumped about 15% so careful what you wish for. :)

[deconstruct60]

There are a few things Apple could do, from least extreme to most extreme...

- Change the Apple logo on the side to black, perhaps even using a plastic insert that would enable them to place the wifi and BT antennas there for better wireless performance


Would be better and more consistent with approaches on other devices to just add a stainless steel strip/frame to part of the back where need to punch through anyway. (e.g. put a small stainless steel frame around the punch out for the PCI cards. )

Similarly, they could go to a move where the handles are stainless steel. Again, like other designs, make a structural element need anyway the antenna. That way they are completely outside of the box. That probably would give them better range than anything else rather than some of middle of the road performance with hiding them behind some Apple shaped plastic do-dad.


- Change the optical drives to slot-loading


That doesn't do much more. They also would be tempted to make the optical drive bays closer together. Right now can "repurpose" them for regular drive slots. If anything could add more support for that (use as drive slots). [ For example the XServe has an option where can plug in a small SSD but not use up any of the drive sled slots. Mac Pro should have something like that. Using the second optical drive slot that way in a supported way would be a good thing. ]



- Remove the handles


On the bottom makes sense to raise up off ground. Again if can get some combo functionality ( antenna ) out of the handles they can stay.

However, adding longer sheets of aluminum to the Mac Pro is ony going to make it heavier and more expensive with relatively minimal increase in internal space gained.




- Extend the size of the chassis in either dimension. Increasing height to accommodate more drive bays or increasing the width or depth to accommodate more RAM slots on the CPU tray


As pointed out they have 6 "drive" bays now if look at in a general sense.


Going wider for one extra RAM slot . If that is the only real motivator change, don't see it happening. Wider can get you a slightly larger diameter fans though. Also Sun/Oracle has a design for PCI-e DIMMs like drives ( again similar to what is in the XServe). If wider may be space to raise the drive sled bay enough to get access to a DIMM-like drive socket to plug into "below" the drives.



- Change the chassis to a cube form factor. Although expensive, this could really get people excited about a Mac Pro again and reduce the "truck" like stigma of it.


It is a truck!! The cube is not more effective use of internal space. A rectangle is better given going to have a flat motherboard.

The "place on your desk an ooooh " at it form factor from apple is the mini. In terms of what the cube (both Apple one and to slightly lessors extent NeXT one ) only need to look at the mini. It is meant to be placed on the desktop.

If anything, being hounded by folks who want a non truck is the Mac Pro's
problem. They are usually the ones who put low value on the differentiating (across Mac lines) features the Mac Pro offers. The Mac Pro should not be a "status symbol" box.



Having said all this, I would never have predicted what they were able to do with the Mini... esp. integrating the PSU into the chassis while making it half the size!


that is in part because it is not have the size ( I guess throwing in the power brick volume but part of the ineffeciency was having to do two power conversions. )

The mini also removed ease of internal access to accomplish this "packing" move. The Mac Pro doesn't need packing. There is no way to increase packing and leave the "ease of access" to internal components the same. If going to have people's hands inside the case need to have room for those hands to get around.



Also, it's worth noting that a case redesign would most likely be accompanied by an increase in price.

Right. No need for a higher price.

The Mac Pro is to a large extent already a unibody design. Trying to mill a brick that large out of an ingot is waste of drilling cooling fluid, time, and drill bits.

[hugodrax]

Cast out the basic shape in aluminum, then machine it to the final product (i.e. think thick sided box without one side).


I hope they toss them, as that could actually allow for additional internal space for drives that users' have clambored for, as well as give more design choices for future boards (i.e. allow things like RAM slots to be of sufficient quantity to keep up with other board offerings).


Keep it, as it's the most logical way to obtain entry to the system (clean too).

But removing the handle means the mac pro will no longer be portable. Sounds like a downgrade to have a non portable mac pro.

[theaero]

No handles, PLEASE, so we can start seeing some decent/real rackmount kits.

[J the Ninja]

No handles, PLEASE, so we can start seeing some decent/real rackmount kits.

http://www.toolstation.com/images/library/stock/webbig/66126.jpg


:p

I wonder if Apple could add some way to detatch the handles and replace them with rackmount ears, kinda like switching the iMac's base for a VESA mount.

[Icaras]

I wonder if Apple could add some way to detatch the handles and replace them with rackmount ears, kinda like switching the iMac's base for a VESA mount.

Great, this reminds me of that removing Mac Pro handles thread.

Hey J, whatever happened to your black ceramic zerconia material idea for the case? :p

But hey, I like the idea of Magnets for the side. I think that's practical.

[advres]

Funny, I work in an edit suite everyday and the only time I look at my tower is to burn a DVD. Who gives a flying **** really? This is a machine to do work on, it doesn't have to be all blingy. And, if you are spending the kind of money on a Mac Pro just to have a Mac Pro you are an idiot and should be forced by law to not be allowed to reproduce.

[J the Ninja]

Great, this reminds me of that removing Mac Pro handles thread.

Hey J, whatever happened to your black ceramic zerconia material idea for the case? :p

But hey, I like the idea of Magnets for the side. I think that's practical.

Oh, I just didn't feel like dredging it back up. I still think it would be awesome. :P

[nanofrog]

But removing the handle means the mac pro will no longer be portable. Sounds like a downgrade to have a non portable mac pro.
Workstations aren't meant to be portable though (they're expected to just sit on either the desk or floor).

The MP is a workstation after all, and I don't recollect many being stated as hauled around as portable systems. Laptops have improved to the point they're acceptable for field use (i.e. data storage for camera output).

[Vylen]

While trucks are well, trucks. Even they go under rigorous testing and modifications for fuel efficiency and speed :P

And slot loading drives on a Mac Pro? Pfft, no way. Doing so would screw people over who use Mini-DVD's (for whatever reason).

The handles are cool though, it lets people do this:

http://theclosetentrepreneur.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/blupics_2.jpg

And while I don't have a Mac Pro, I have a similar set up like this - got my power boards mounted to the underside of my desk along with cables and other things like USB hubs and devices that dont need to be on my desk or on the floor.

Sure makes cleaning the carpet easier without risk of knocking adapters out of their sockets (did that once, blew the fuse on my subwoofer - fortunately they are replaceable, naturally)

[jayhawk11]

While trucks are well, trucks. Even they go under rigorous testing and modifications for fuel efficiency and speed :P

***SNIP***


Clean look. I like it.

[mcpryon2]

http://www.toolstation.com/images/library/stock/webbig/66126.jpg





Only $129.99 at the Apple Store and online.

[Icaras]

http://theclosetentrepreneur.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/blupics_2.jpg

For all it's intent and purposes, for some reason, that still looks frightening to me :(

But I guess it's ok if you're the user and sitting down since you won't see all of that.

Staying clean and organized can definitely take quite a lot of work and strategy.

[PowerGamerX]

I think they will probably change the design just a little bit (possibly a tad smaller, the thing is huge), but what I really want to see is a cheaper desktop quad core model with 4gb of ram and perhaps just a 500gb HDD for 1799.

[Ravich]

For all it's intent and purposes, for some reason, that still looks frightening to me :(

But I guess it's ok if you're the user and sitting down since you won't see all of that.

Staying clean and organized can definitely take quite a lot of work and strategy.

I bet not having to worry about dust is the coolest thing ever though.

[yoak]

Please keep the handles. I move my mp around quite a bit. It has traveled all over the country with me. Actually, the only change I would like is room for more drives and a blu-Ray burner

[JID]

Apple should buy high spec-level (i.e., high performance gaming) Dell machines, match OS X to the components, put an apple logo sticker over the Dell name, then sell for less than half what the Pro costs. And still make a decent profit.

[Vylen]

I bet not having to worry about dust is the coolest thing ever though.

Only need to worry about cutting your own legs on the cable ties under the desk ;)

I've scrapped my legs a few times initially, till i bothered to file and dull the edges of the plastic heheh. Now it's all good :P

[deconstruct60]

Apple should buy high spec-level (i.e., high performance gaming) Dell machines, match OS X to the components, .

A Dell T7550 (capable of holding 4 hard drives without gimmicks) with 5620 and 700GB drive ..... where is half the price? Some 10-20% lower with dell discounts and etc. yes. 50% lower.... no.

There is all kind of Dell stuff with less capable cases , smaller power supplies , and host of other chopped off features. However, if compare list prices on highly equivalent offerings then they are about the same. Sure comparing apples to oranges, the prices are different.

[you39]

Apple should buy high spec-level (i.e., high performance gaming) Dell machines, match OS X to the components, put an apple logo sticker over the Dell name, then sell for less than half what the Pro costs. And still make a decent profit.

Yeah... and thus ruin their brand name more than a 10 years overdue Mac Pro ever could. ;)

[J the Ninja]

I just realized something yesterday. I had to Google it to make sure I remembered it correctly, but it seems I did:

Tri-channel is a passing thing.

Sandy Bridge will do quad-channel, by all accounts. Bulldozer is either going to be quad, or just dual. 6 RAM slots now would be useful for 1 generation, and that's it. Maybe Apple knew what they were doing after all....

[nanofrog]

I just realized something yesterday. I had to Google it to make sure I remembered it correctly, but it seems I did:

Tri-channel is a passing thing.

Sandy Bridge will do quad-channel, by all accounts. Bulldozer is either going to be quad, or just dual. 6 RAM slots now would be useful for 1 generation, and that's it. Maybe Apple knew what they were doing after all....
Well, when Sandy Bridge's Quad channel parts are available, then we'll see boards with 8x DIMM slots or more per CPU (i.e. smaller form factors will stick to 2x DIMM's per channel, while server boards, which are usually larger form factors, 3x DIMM's per channel), just as it is now.

Apple's DIMM slot limitations in the 2009's were due to the physical constraints that resulted in their design choices (daughterboard config, and using the existing case).

[J the Ninja]

Well, when Sandy Bridge's Quad channel parts are available, then we'll see boards with 8x DIMM slots or more per CPU (i.e. smaller form factors will stick to 2x DIMM's per channel, while server boards, which are usually larger form factors, 3x DIMM's per channel), just as it is now.

Apple's DIMM slot limitations in the 2009's were due to the physical constraints that resulted in their design choices (daughterboard config, and using the existing case).

Not necessarily, there are a good number of Xeon 5520 boards that have only 6 slots total, ie, one slot per CPU/channel. My point was that "RAM slots should be in multiples of 3" isn't going to be a long-term thing.

[OGDaniel]

It's just flabbergasting to me that someone who doesn't do like work for a TV studio or something along those lines would need a Mac Pro, but I guess people just use them for everyday use, but that's crazy to me. The Mac Pro is so powerful, but I couldn't imagine a task at home that would necessitate that much power.

I think they're keeping the handles. The handles are classic and traditional, used since the Power Mac's, I like the handles. I can't think of any changes to its design besides a unibody enclosure, it's such a flawless machine nonetheless.

[theaero]

Keep the handles... just make it like 3 inches shorter. Rackmountplzz.

[TennisandMusic]

It's just flabbergasting to me that someone who doesn't do like work for a TV studio or something along those lines would need a Mac Pro, but I guess people just use them for everyday use, but that's crazy to me. The Mac Pro is so powerful, but I couldn't imagine a task at home that would necessitate that much power.

I think they're keeping the handles. The handles are classic and traditional, used since the Power Mac's, I like the handles. I can't think of any changes to its design besides a unibody enclosure, it's such a flawless machine nonetheless.

Uhh...the Mac Pro isn't THAT powerful. The current iMac quad's have better CPU's than the base quad core mac. Plus "working in a tv studio" is hardly a qualifier for needing a decent machine. There are plenty of uses for good machines that do not require you to work for a network.

What's flabbergasting to me are people who assume that because they don't need something (or apparently really understand it), then no one does.

[phaedarus]

You all realize that the handles serve a dual purpose right?

They keep the Mac Pro a few inches above the floor level to reduce the accumulation of dust which is heaviest on the ground surface.

[Icaras]

You all realize that the handles serve a dual purpose right?

They keep the Mac Pro a few inches above the floor level to reduce the accumulation of dust which is heaviest on the ground surface.

I don't think anyone is really disputing the bottom handles (should they even be deserving of the word "handles" if your hands never really touch them? :confused:)

But the top handles, the real handles, are probably not absolutely necessary for the Mac Pro. Removing those could give way for extra room for additional internals.

[J the Ninja]

I don't think anyone is really disputing the bottom handles (should they even be deserving of the word "handles" if your hands never really touch them? :confused:)

But the top handles, the real handles, are probably not absolutely necessary for the Mac Pro. Removing those could give way for extra room for additional internals.

Then it is no longer vertically symmetrical. (or would that be horizontally symmetrical?) Whichever one it is, Ive and Jobs wouldn't let it fly like that. In fact, it would look like it's on stilts.

[Techhie]

But the top handles, the real handles, are probably not absolutely necessary for the Mac Pro. Removing those could give way for extra room for additional internals.

You can't remove them and maintain symmetry. Jonny Ive would have a fit.

[TennisandMusic]

Aren't the handles a good thing? It's a pretty heavy machine. I'm actually starting to consider the dual 2.26 over waiting for the hex. Ugh.

[theaero]

....
rackmountttt

[southerndoc]

What's flabbergasting to me are people who assume that because they don't need something (or apparently really understand it), then no one does.

If I were on a budget, I wouldn't consider purchasing a MacPro.

I don't do video production, but I do create some very large Word documents that require me to make complex indices. Ever try to index something in Word? It's a resource hog when you're dealing with a lot of pages. (Granted not as much a resource hog as Photoshop, but it puts a strain on my iMac C2D 2.8).

The main reason I want a MacPro is to set up dual 24" displays. I could probably do this with my iMac 24", but I'm not sure the screens are the same (the iMac is 2 years old), and not sure if they are the same height.

In the end, why do we lay people want to buy a multi-core MacPro? The same reason we want to climb Mt. Everest: because we can.

[Icaras]

Then it is no longer vertically symmetrical. (or would that be horizontally symmetrical?) Whichever one it is, Ive and Jobs wouldn't let it fly like that. In fact, it would look like it's on stilts.

You can't remove them and maintain symmetry. Jonny Ive would have a fit.

Ok you guys got me there. Handles stay then. :rolleyes:

[Vylen]

The main reason I want a MacPro is to set up dual 24" displays. I could probably do this with my iMac 24", but I'm not sure the screens are the same (the iMac is 2 years old), and not sure if they are the same height.

I want a Mac Pro for not only the CPU/RAM you can stick in it but cause I want to be able to use more than 2 monitors. I want 3 at least :P Got a dual monitor setup going with my iMac right now, and although it's possible to use more on any system (google DisplayLink) it's in its infancy and I don't want to waste CPU processing on costly USB devices.

I'm a programmer, and the more desktop space the better.

[harveypooka]

Will they keep or get rid of side access?

The side access will be replaced with a door to another dimension. A dimension where Apple products grow on trees and "re-grow" every few weeks. Everyone can now have a Mac, there is no famine (as you can eat your Apples, too) and PCs are a virus.

[theaero]

Ok you guys got me there. Handles stay then. :rolleyes:


Rackmount! >:(

[Techhie]

The side access will be replaced with a door to another dimension. A dimension where Apple products grow on trees and "re-grow" every few weeks.

"A dimension not of sight or sound but of mind...this is, the Twilight Zone!"
:eek::rolleyes::D:p

[shokunin]

It's just flabbergasting to me that someone who doesn't do like work for a TV studio or something along those lines would need a Mac Pro, but I guess people just use them for everyday use, but that's crazy to me. The Mac Pro is so powerful, but I couldn't imagine a task at home that would necessitate that much power.

I think they're keeping the handles. The handles are classic and traditional, used since the Power Mac's, I like the handles. I can't think of any changes to its design besides a unibody enclosure, it's such a flawless machine nonetheless.

That's what people were saying back in the dual-cpu days with single-core chips. But the Mac Pro is the only real choice available from Apple (not counting DIY) for a truly expandable machine. I have 5 internal drives and another 8 external via 2 PCIe Sonnet eSATA cards. i need storage and I like having my extra cores to run my 3 other virtual machines in VMware.

As for the design, I love the handles, it makes moving the Pro around easier than lifting it from the bottom.

I would love to see 2 or 4 dedicated 2.5" drive bays for SSDs in addition to the current four 3.5" hard drive bays, which would mean more onboard SATA channels.

[Ravich]

How long before desktops switch to 2.5'' drives altogether?

[nick9191]

It's not going to lose handles, its not going to loose easy access.

If they did redesign it, which I doubt they will, 10% smaller, slot loading drives, black Apple logo, and higher prices.

[ValSalva]

It's not going to lose handles, its not going to loose easy access.

If they did redesign it, which I doubt they will, 10% smaller, slot loading drives, black Apple logo, and higher prices.

I think you're right. But I hope Apple doesn't make it too much smaller. I hope they leave enough room to stick everything but the kitchen sink in one.

[mstrze]

And while I don't have a Mac Pro, I have a similar set up like this - got my power boards mounted to the underside of my desk along with cables and other things like USB hubs and devices that dont need to be on my desk or on the floor.

Sure makes cleaning the carpet easier without risk of knocking adapters out of their sockets (did that once, blew the fuse on my subwoofer - fortunately they are replaceable, naturally)

Have you had any issues with heat buildup? I notice the person's setup in that picture (not your's correct?) has at least one Mac Mini mounted under the desk and...well...everything else. Since computers and peripherals are normally designed for a world where heat rises easily away from the units, I would think that some of these items might fail as the underside of the desk traps heat. I would imagine the underside of your desk gets pretty toasty.

[strausd]

It's not going to lose handles, its not going to loose easy access.

If they did redesign it, which I doubt they will, 10% smaller, slot loading drives, black Apple logo, and higher prices.

If they did redesign it the price wouldn't go up much higher, if at all.

[deconstruct60]

I just realized something yesterday. I had to Google it to make sure I remembered it correctly, but it seems I did:

Tri-channel is a passing thing.

Sandy Bridge will do quad-channel, by all accounts.

the Nehalem-EX proccessor will have quad channel before Sandy Bridge gets release. When get to 6+ cores you need 4 channels to keep all the cores feed in more often. However, it would be uniform. Intel is likely to also use number of memory channels as a market segementation device ( similar to how removed features from lower priced offerings in the past: VT, threading, boost , etc.)

So only the upper end Sandy Bridge parts will get it. Most likely the 6 core parts will since should have had it in the first place. Coin toss whether they put it on the 4 core parts; pretty good chance will not. The less than 4 core parts definitely not.

Intel isn't going to switch their entire line over to 6 core parts even after Sandy Bridge is the primary mainstream arch they are shipping.


P.S. Just saw another article that said Intel is going to push IGP (e.g., on die graphics) hard on sandy bridge models. For workstation class versions of that microarchitecture that won't be the more likely config. However, that does pragmatically increase the core count on the die. So yes will have "6 cores" (actually more) on their mainstream offerings. It just isn't "core" as has been used in conversation till now. Tri channel passing because the graphics are coming on die.

On 1P servers IGP makes sense. Few folks buy a lower end server to play games or watch Blu-ray full HD movies on it.

[xgman]

I'd take a card board box at this point . . . . :rolleyes: (and I'm dead serious)

[sal]

The Mac Pro is really an anomaly among Apple products. It's the only one where raw power (and expandability) is the main issue. Apple doesn't focus on (and sometimes conceals) the tech specs of the iPhone and iPad. And raw power takes a back seat for most Macs - where they talk mainly about design, the display, weight, hipness, etc.

But the Mac Pro is a truck. At least for those of us who use its power to drive heavy loads that weaker models can't handle. What matters is what's under the hood. I really couldn't care less about external design changes unless they somehow improve function.

If the new 2010s (and beyond) look just like my 2004 G5 Power Mac, I'll be just fine with that. I suppose others will welcome some cool new look. But for me, it's not something that I would want Apple to spend a whole lot of time delaying updates for.

you are correct and I agree with you 100%. for consumer products, needing to change the look is important to get people to buy the newest version(see iphones, ipods, imacs, etc)

for pro machines, the look is secondary and power is everything. As long as apple keeps the hardware updated frequently with the newest and greatest hardware, that is what matters to professionals. Apple should focus on that exclusively and if it so happens they have time to create a new design then great. It just shouldn't be their priority.

[deconstruct60]

I think they're keeping the handles. The handles are classic and traditional, used since the Power Mac's, I like the handles. I can't think of any changes to its design besides a unibody enclosure, it's such a flawless machine nonetheless.

Went back and looked closely at a Mac Pro case. It already is a unibody case. The "handles" aren't some separate bolted/screwed on thing.

The primary structural element of the case is formed by taking a single sheet of aluminum and forming a 'C' shape. The "handles" and left side (when looking on from the front) is one single sheet. The "handles" are formed by cutting slices out of that single sheet. That is unibody construction (moving the structural loads to the frame so have more interior room). The side panel that comes off helps handle loads transfered on that side when in place. (similar to the bottoms that come of the unibody laptops. )

That external wrapper allows them to poke more holes in the front and back of the "inner" box. The inner box doesn't have to support the weight either. If peeled off that a wrapper, the inner box would bend and twist much more easily.

Only case upgrade can think of is if they wanted to collapse the Mac Pro and XServe enclosures. The could make an inner box that either plugged into a upright 'C' wrapper or a 'rackmount' wrapper. However, don't really see them doing that though. ( the orientation on the optical drives for one. The XServe looses 1U height for another. ) And if XServe can't hold its own revenues wise, they seem more likely to just cancel it.

would be easier to "rackount" the Mac Pros vertically. ( put in a shelf and secure them as pack in side by side. ). A crossbar that mounts to the rack and latched on to "handles" could secure them in place. They aren't going to a dense pack option because never intended to be. That is what XServes are for. :)

[Vylen]

Have you had any issues with heat buildup? I notice the person's setup in that picture (not your's correct?) has at least one Mac Mini mounted under the desk and...well...everything else. Since computers and peripherals are normally designed for a world where heat rises easily away from the units, I would think that some of these items might fail as the underside of the desk traps heat. I would imagine the underside of your desk gets pretty toasty.

This is my setup:
http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-ak-sf2p/v335/52/95/537467851/n537467851_911550_2609.jpg
http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-ak-sf2p/v335/52/95/537467851/n537467851_911549_1840.jpg
http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-ak-sf2p/v335/52/95/537467851/n537467851_911548_956.jpg

Out of date though - modem (3rd picture) got changed. Additional devices were added, power boards are now full :P Some wiring changes.

Have had this setup for under 2 years. No problems with heat. I presume the pegboard material can sort of act as a way to dissipate heat slightly.

[dh2005]

Pardon my intrusion. I saw "new mini" in the link and followed it...

... can I ask whether or not I'm missing something? Only, the Mac Pro seems like an absolutely scandalous rip-off, to me. Reading the specs, I reckon I could build a PC from the ground up for something like sixty-to-seventy percent of the price. True, it wouldn't be anywhere near as tough-looking (and they are damned tough-looking...), but I have to ask - where the Hell does all the money go? Does Apple reckon OS X is worth $1,000...?


EDIT: To put my potentially controversial comments into context... I own a 2009 Mini, so I'm no stranger to being overcharged for underspec'd hardware. In the Mini, I reckon there's a similar performance-to-price ratio; but I don't mind, because I accept that I paid a premium for the tiny form factor. But really, where's the like pay-off for the Mac Pro? To my mind, it's just a disgustingly poor value, full-sized desktop computer.

Please, if I've missed something, let me know. I'm relatively new to Macs, so it's very possible that I might've done.

[deconstruct60]

... To my mind, it's just a disgustingly poor value, full-sized desktop computer.

Please, if I've missed something, let me know.

You can start with the fact it isn't intended to sit on your desk. So it isn't a desktop computer. There is longer list after that, but not particularly worth going into since missed that obvious one.

[dh2005]

Yowch. Pissy, much?

[OrangeSVTguy]

I think the handles and feet are here to stay. How else would you remove the MP from the box? Turn it upside down and let it slide out? :p

[dh2005]

You can start with the fact it isn't intended to sit on your desk. So it isn't a desktop computer. There is longer list after that, but not particularly worth going into since missed that obvious one.

My friend's father's a professional photographer and has two Mac Pros, on two different desks in his studio. I guess I'll just call him up at 1AM and tell him that "deconstruct60" of Macrumors forums says that he'd never make a living as an interior designer...


Does anyone have anything positive and distinctive to say about the Pro? Something that makes it better than the sum of its parts?

[bocomo]

unless they are going to let me put more HDs (raid 5) or more ram in it, i don't care for a redesign. i like that it's big (easy to service/add on to) and i don't care if it looks cool

[nanofrog]

You can start with the fact it isn't intended to sit on your desk. So it isn't a desktop computer. There is longer list after that, but not particularly worth going into since missed that obvious one.
It requires a wall socket for a power source rather than a battery, so it's not a laptop/portable. Nor is it a rackmount enclosure.

So what other physical classification does it fit?

[lemonade-maker]

My friend's father's a professional photographer and has two Mac Pros, on two different desks in his studio. I guess I'll just call him up at 1AM and tell him that "deconstruct60" of Macrumors forums says that he'd never make a living as an interior designer...


Does anyone have anything positive and distinctive to say about the Pro? Something that makes it better than the sum of its parts?

I make a really nice living on mine and its paid for itself many times over. I will give it to my 5 year old when the next one comes.

Only the IRS cares about the price.

[telequest]

I make a really nice living on mine and its paid for itself many times over. I will give it to my 5 year old when the next one comes.

Your 5 year old might be ready to make a living by the time the next one comes out. :p

[Vylen]

It requires a wall socket for a power source rather than a battery, so it's not a laptop/portable. Nor is it a rackmount enclosure.

So what other physical classification does it fit?

It's a.... floortop? Cause not many people opt to put such a behemoth on top of their desks :P

[theaero]

Its just a tower. :)

But it needs to be able to fit nicely in my racks! :D

[Octobot]

It's just flabbergasting to me that someone who doesn't do like work for a TV studio or something along those lines would need a Mac Pro, but I guess people just use them for everyday use, but that's crazy to me. The Mac Pro is so powerful, but I couldn't imagine a task at home that would necessitate that much power.

I think they're keeping the handles. The handles are classic and traditional, used since the Power Mac's, I like the handles. I can't think of any changes to its design besides a unibody enclosure, it's such a flawless machine nonetheless.

There are quite a few independents, freelancers and small studios who use 'em for rendering, editing, music etc. (I being an independent).. And yes some who just decide they want one.
...

New handle design. Similar effectiveness.

[Octobot]

I think the handles and feet are here to stay. How else would you remove the MP from the box? Turn it upside down and let it slide out? :p

They will design the boxes like the iPad & iPhone ones.. Top slides off.;)

[nanofrog]

It's a.... floortop? Cause not many people opt to put such a behemoth on top of their desks :P
It's a mid-tower, which is at a size that it can be placed either on the desk or floor (though I do agree that on the desk can be a tad awkward, especially if they're typically more familiar with mini-towers).

But it's by no means a full size tower, which is too big for anywhere but the floor.

[dh2005]

I make a really nice living on mine and its paid for itself many times over. I will give it to my 5 year old when the next one comes.

Only the IRS cares about the price.

Thanks for the non-douche reply.


I can see how that would be... but is there anything about the Pro that makes it distinctly better than a kit-built PC with the same components? Does it have a particularly excellent service-record, or warranty? Because I'd want either or both, for that kinda money.

[nanofrog]

I can see how that would be... but is there anything about the Pro that makes it distinctly better than a kit-built PC with the same components? Does it have a particularly excellent service-record, or warranty? Because I'd want either or both, for that kinda money.
They're built out of the same parts as any other workstation system that uses the same processor, so reliability is approximately the same (some board makers do cut corners on things like resistors and capacitors, and PC boards may have additional features not offered in the MP, such as eSATA or built-in hardware RAID (LSI 1064 for example).

As per warranty, you have to pay extra to extend Apple Care beyond it's initial time period of one year, and it's usually carried into the nearest Apple store (PC workstation and servers come with 3yr Next Day on-site support).

Apple does offer on-site if you're within 50 miles of an Apple Store, but they're difficult about it (i.e. act as if they're doing you a MASSIVE favor), and it typically takes longer, according to those that have successfully obtained service that way.

Keep in mind, this is on systems built by PC vendors vs. the MP, not a DIY build. In that case, you're on the hook for all diagnostics, tracking down warranty support from individual suppliers, ... So there is definitely a "cost" to go this route.

If you're earning a living with the system, then it's best to get a vendor built system (i.e. Dell, HP,...). But if you're say an enthusiast or student for example, the trade-offs may be acceptable (have the ability to put forth the necessary time in case of a problem).

[deconstruct60]

I
So what other physical classification does it fit?

Workstation (or Deskside , which is typically assigned to servers). Desktop is a generic, catch all, nondescriptive category that folks use to classify mainstream personal computers with. Go to Dell's, HP's, IBM's, etc. sites and see if they don't draw a distinction.

Workstations have historically been much more closer to entry level servers that are assigned to one person. Usually because that person has workload that makes them not so favorable to timeshare on a shared server, but a server level of workload.

The Mac Pro is more so an XServe in a vertically oriented box that can sit on the floor instead of a rack as opposed to a mini in a bigger case. Would be closer to a 2U XServe if one existed. The Mac Pro has much more historical design motivations from the history of Unix Workstations than from the original IBM PC. It actually is a Unix workstation with a candy coated UI.

Going past the initial Sun and Apollo pizza boxes, these typically moved off the desktop because typically were coupled with larger monitor(s) and a variety of input devices ( input pad , dial boxes , etc. ) which tends to consume much of the flat working space. So the designs were/are highly motivated to enable moving the box off somewhere else and run cable(s) to the monitor(s) over a significant distance.

If can stick the box on the desktop two inches away from the monitor... why not merge them. Need a cable to run a several inches ?

[Vylen]

Thanks for the non-douche reply.


I can see how that would be... but is there anything about the Pro that makes it distinctly better than a kit-built PC with the same components? Does it have a particularly excellent service-record, or warranty? Because I'd want either or both, for that kinda money.

I suppose they have an excellent service-record. There are still people using their Mac Pro from years ago - including those who are still using its predecessor, the Powe Mac G5.

[lemonade-maker]

Thanks for the non-douche reply.


I can see how that would be... but is there anything about the Pro that makes it distinctly better than a kit-built PC with the same components? Does it have a particularly excellent service-record, or warranty? Because I'd want either or both, for that kinda money.

My dev setup is made of my 2009 mac pro dual as a work station, several dell high-end servers and some nice slapped-together machines to do unimportant tasks (like dns, for example).

The mac does everything I need, mostly terminal based stuff. It can crank through giant datasets and not flinch. I don't want a linux workstation, although all my servers are linux. gnome, kde and others suck as a desktop. A comparable non-mac machine costs about the same. Windows and ssh really doesn't mix well and windows can run in a vm on the mac if needed. For what I do, its the best choice. It has the bonus of a nice, well designed GUI.

As far as on-site service is concerned, all my dell servers have on-site service. Its usually faster to diagnose it myself (in fact always in my case).

[deconstruct60]

They're built out of the same parts as any other workstation system that uses the same processor, so reliability is approximately the same

Reliability is not going to be same if the generic case has a jacked up thermal design or the components jammed into it willy nilly screw up what the case was designed around.

Sure can pour fans on the case like ketchup ("a class 2 tornado inside the box should take care of any problems we overlooked" ) , but that increases noise and if done poorly just wastes almost as much energy and it pulls out of the case.

Some of these parts are cheaper also because if you need a replacement part 3 years from now ... good luck. They don't make them anymore and not inventoried anywhere. You can go to eBay for parts but you'll have no idea what that user did to that part beforehand.

Also paying for Mac OS X support also though. Bug fixes and security updates ( these "I shaved $1,000" claims often shave dollars off of the OS price. Windows7 Ultra/Deluxe tends to cost more. ).

It is not the parts, because often in these $1,000 cheaper claims, the parts are not equivalent. They are just superficially equivalent and folks cherry pick off the specifications and design criteria they want to match. It is the trade-offs that are the larger differential in part costs. The rest of it is Apple's profit margin, which partially means they are around in the future, and has value if want service or another box in the future.

Integrating (making the choices and hooking them up) is worth money. Time, labor, and/or skill. (again the cheaper claims come from not counting everything that is involved either from lack of observation or just willful ignorance. )

[nanofrog]

Workstation (or Deskside , which is typically assigned to servers). Desktop is a generic, catch all, nondescriptive category that folks use to classify mainstream personal computers with. Go to Dell's, HP's, IBM's, etc. sites and see if they don't draw a distinction.
In all of the years I've been in the industry, I've never known anyone to use the term Deskside. I do realize what you mean by the term, but I'm accustomed with Mid-Tower filling that definition (capable of both desk, floor, or a shelf system attached to the desk itself for physical location).

I even indicated that previously to try and clear things up. :confused: Guess it didn't work. :D :p

BTW, my familiarity with the term Desktop originally meant unit that laid flat (i.e. original IBM PC, and almost always had the monitor sitting on top of it), but later included the Mini-Tower (and the monitor set beside it).

Just different nomenclature I guess, but it can help clear things up. ;)

Workstations have historically been much more closer to entry level servers that are assigned to one person. Usually because that person has workload that makes them not so favorable to timeshare on a shared server, but a server level of workload.
I've not argued against this. :confused:

At any rate, it wasn't that long ago that the same processor was use for consumer, workstation, or entry level server (i.e. 80486 systems were that way, as the split began with Pentium Pro as I see it with Intel parts, as the Pentium II Xeon was the introduction of the Xeon badge).

The Mac Pro is more so an XServe in a vertically oriented box that can sit on the floor instead of a rack as opposed to a mini in a bigger case. Would be closer to a 2U XServe if one existed. The Mac Pro has much more historical design motivations from the history of Unix Workstations than from the original IBM PC. It actually is a Unix workstation with a candy coated UI.
From a component POV, yes, it does (same DP Xeons, same chipset). But take expansion into account (in general), they've split a bit (i.e. servers using on-board graphics), and fewer expansion slots in some cases, depending on the actual size of the rackmount enclosure (i.e. 2U vs. 5U). This also includes space for storage, as workstations tend to require larger storage pools for that system, rather than off-load it to a separate storage server (less expensive to include it in the system if doesn't need to be available to the entire network).

By going to pedestal cases (mid or full size towers), they can add additional slots to the board, more HDD locations, and use commodity large value PSU's (low profile PSU's are more expensive).

Ultimately, going to a different physical arrangement for a workstation produced lower costs, which won out over previous system types offered by SGI, Sun,... And with the advent of Linux or Open Solaris for example, Intel systems can run UNIX (hacking OS X not considered an option in a business environment).

Reliability is not going to be same if the generic case has a jacked up thermal design or the components jammed into it willy nilly screw up what the case was designed around.
I meant in terms of each component (board, graphics,...). As per the case, it takes the right selection, as with anything else (it's just another component to me, and has to be selected properly for the intended system).

Assuming proper cooling and other considerations (i.e. good build quality parts) are taken into account, it's not going to be much different.

If building out of Xeons, the price difference narrows, especially for DP systems (still a notable difference for a SP Xeon system vs. the '09 Quad MP).

But I also mentioned there's compromise for that lower cost in the form of user = all support (hardware and OS, assuming it's OS X or Linux; a Retail copy of Windows does come with support for a period of time; rather short, but it's there).

But neither a DIY system, or Hackintosh one at that, are acceptable for a business. That's a fools errand IMO.

An enthusiast OTOH, could be another story (if they're willing, have the time to do so when needed, and have the skills).

[PeterQVenkman]

It is not the parts, because often in these $1,000 cheaper claims, the parts are not equivalent.

I don't care if the parts are equivalent or not when much faster hardware is available at MUCH cheaper prices from non-apple vendors.* :(

*talking single processor config only here.

[inguatu]

I suppose they have an excellent service-record. There are still people using their Mac Pro from years ago - including those who are still using its predecessor, the Powe Mac G5.


Are you insinuating Apple still provides support for the Power Mac G5 directly?

[inguatu]

The Mac Pro is more so an XServe in a vertically oriented box that can sit on the floor instead of a rack as opposed to a mini in a bigger case. Would be closer to a 2U XServe if one existed. The Mac Pro has much more historical design motivations from the history of Unix Workstations than from the original IBM PC. It actually is a Unix workstation with a candy coated UI.

You love grasping at straws to solidify your love for the brand. That's apparent throughout your posts. That's fine. People are allowed to be fanboys of a product just long as it doesn't blind them to reality and facts. The Mac Pro *is* a workstation class PC. Plain and simple. It's not an Xserve in a different box. It never claimed to be, never pretended to be. You're making that up because you think it's more magical than a PC with another label, or a custom built homemade box. It's just a PC with an OS based on Unix. That may piss of some fanboys who chose to believe Apple makes something more than a workstation class PC, called a MacPro. Linux, Windows and OSX can be installed on it. It's a PC, made by Apple.

I use a Mac Pro, PCs, MBP. I just don't get into the hype and b.s. people try to pump out surrounding products. It' s just another brand of workstation I use to do work. Am I hoping for a sizeable refresh to the Mac Pro line? Yes. Am I willing to pay an arm and a leg compared to other brands of PCs? Probably not at this point.

If Jobs wants to focus on iCrap and leave the pro apps line to fester (already behind Avid 5 and Adobe CS5) and other Mac brands pushed aside just to push more iJunk to iSheep, then have at it. I won't be along for the ride. I'm loyal to my work, not a brand. If I can build a better box, or another company like Boxx can, I don't need Apple. Apple is in a great position selling things people don't always need, but are cool as hell so they *want* them. Apple has great appeal!

[Vylen]

Are you insinuating Apple still provides support for the Power Mac G5 directly?

What? No. He asked if the Mac Pro's have a better "service record" than other Apple Machines... that means (to me), he's asking if the Mac Pro's run better/longer than other machines - i.e. they stay in service/use. Which should be evident with the horrid iMac quality a sof late.

[MacHamster68]

its only logical that the Mac pro's are longer in use , they are the most expensive Mac's you can buy and always had been ,even in the days of the Power Mac , if you have to spend double what you spend on a for example iMac or 4 times what you spend on a mini , then of course you can expect it to last longer and if it would not then it would be money wasted

[PeterQVenkman]

its only logical that the Mac pro's are longer in use , they are the most expensive Mac's you can buy and always had been ,even in the days of the Power Mac , if you have to spend double what you spend on a for example iMac or 4 times what you spend on a mini , then of course you can expect it to last longer and if it would not then it would be money wasted

A while back, I and my bosses wasted money on G5's that didn't last. Out new intel based new Mac Pros seem to be better so far.

[slughead]

There is all kind of Dell stuff with less capable cases , smaller power supplies , and host of other chopped off features. However, if compare list prices on highly equivalent offerings then they are about the same. Sure comparing apples to oranges, the prices are different.

... Because cases and PSUs, in a $2,600 machine, are a huge part of the cost.

You can get an awesome case and PSU for under $200.

I like what Apple did with the first mac pro: it was cheaper than one you could build yourself. Of course I'm biased because I own one.

Today, you can EASILY get a $1,500 home built that's better and faster than a mac pro. This is not an iMac: most mac pro users could build their own.

[slughead]

Does anyone have anything positive and distinctive to say about the Pro? Something that makes it better than the sum of its parts?

It's magical (http://scholarlykitchen.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/magical-ipad.jpg)?

Seriously though: Once you realize--I mean really realize--that a computer is just a bunch of parts, most of which are not special in any way (and are usually similar in quality), you really get annoyed with brand loyalty.

The difference between the Mac Pro and all other Macs is JUST that it's the only Mac that ignores (or should ignore) form factor.

You pay extra for the portability of the Laptops and the desk-space economization of the Mac Mini or the iMac. However, for the Mac Pro, the only distinguishing characteristic should be PRICE.

Mac Pros use (or should use) STANDARD FORM FACTOR parts, and therefore should be the LOWEST PRICE/PERFORMANCE ratio of the macs, not the highest. They are easy to assemble and use STANDARD parts.

The iMac/Mac Mini have an excuse for being expensive (even though they're not): they use extremely customized parts to fit into their small form factor. The Mac Pro does not. Economics of scale dictate the Mac Pro should be updated more frequently and should be of a higher value (ignoring aesthetics).

IMO, the fact that the Mac Pro isn't being updated and is still using old parts (and thus a worse value) is due to Apples over-customization of the motherboard and case components.

The "New" Mac Pro should have as few custom parts as possible. They should use inexpensive, mass-produced yet high quality components that are already on the market (or at least as much of them as possible). No more gigantic grey case fans, just use a standard 120MM. No more stupid aluminum cages that make it a bitch to swap out the CPU, just an empty box with the mobo screwed to the side-wall and case fans in the back. No more ridiculous [UNRELIABLE] PSU with no label on it, just cut a deal with Thermaltake for an all black 1.5KWatt monster.

Take a standard high-end Intel motherboard, tack on some EFI and design the case around it. Duct tape the thing together and sell it at a reasonable price. You could even stuff it inside a brushed aluminum case with an apple sticker on the side and call it good.

The hilarious part that fanboys don't get is: Apple's parts are lower quality than the consumer computer component market (like stuff out of newegg) that sells for a fraction of the cost. Apple uses ***** hard drives (Maxtor/hitachi) and ***** RAM. They use THE WORST DVD burners (Sony). Their video cards are buggy/crappy (Radeon 2600) and outdated. Even their "custom" looking components have mass failure like their PSUs. And by the way, they charge more for it.

It's not entirely their fault. Apple's painted themselves into a corner by making these "sleek" formfactors that require custom parts. The more customized the parts, the smaller the scale of fabrication, and therefore the higher the price to produce and to develop (per unit). It also costs more to engineer (or re-engineer, as they often do), on top of re-certifying everything at every step through the FCC. Their custom cases and PSUs have to be run through the regulators with practically each new revision. I'm suggesting they abandon that model for the Mac Pro and just make an "unsexy" 'PC-style' high-quality, high-value box. It's what pro-sumers really want (high-power/quality, low price), abandons the "Sleekness" that is really extraneous to professionals, and has very little cost to create new revisions.

[MacHamster68]

you did mentioned it "aesthetics " and aesthetics are important thats why people buy Apple products , nobody buys a Mac because of its superior build quality or because of superior parts used
the aesthetics and osx are the main reasons to buy a Mac , and the reason why loads odf people do not build their own hackintosh is simple , first you just cant use any hardware like for example if you would build a linux rig , and not everybody is able to build one and doesn't know anybody who could build a proper hackintosh where everything works , and still limited to specially sourced hardware and installing is osx is also not as easy als for exaple linux or windows ....so they buy the next best ...a mac pro

Apple should go and create a new case with a some standard motherboards to choose from , which would leave the option for people to use any case on the market if they so wish and more driver support for not just only a couple parts would be a plus too
i mean a fully customizable Mac pro so customers had the option , to choose the hardware including processors they really need or want and not only the couple options apple is offering now

[the editor]

It's magical (http://scholarlykitchen.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/magical-ipad.jpg)?

Seriously though: Once you realize--I mean really realize--that a computer is just a bunch of parts, most of which are not special in any way (and are usually similar in quality), you really get annoyed with brand loyalty.

The difference between the Mac Pro and all other Macs is JUST that it's the only Mac that ignores (or should ignore) form factor.

You pay extra for the portability of the Laptops and the desk-space economization of the Mac Mini or the iMac. However, for the Mac Pro, the only distinguishing characteristic should be PRICE.

Mac Pros use (or should use) STANDARD FORM FACTOR parts, and therefore should be the LOWEST PRICE/PERFORMANCE ratio of the macs, not the highest. They are easy to assemble and use STANDARD parts.

The iMac/Mac Mini have an excuse for being expensive (even though they're not): they use extremely customized parts to fit into their small form factor. The Mac Pro does not. Economics of scale dictate the Mac Pro should be updated more frequently and should be of a higher value (ignoring aesthetics).

IMO, the fact that the Mac Pro isn't being updated and is still using old parts (and thus a worse value) is due to Apples over-customization of the motherboard and case components.

The "New" Mac Pro should have as few custom parts as possible. They should use inexpensive, mass-produced yet high quality components that are already on the market (or at least as much of them as possible). No more gigantic grey case fans, just use a standard 120MM. No more stupid aluminum cages that make it a bitch to swap out the CPU, just an empty box with the mobo screwed to the side-wall and case fans in the back. No more ridiculous [UNRELIABLE] PSU with no label on it, just cut a deal with Thermaltake for an all black 1.5KWatt monster.

Take a standard high-end Intel motherboard, tack on some EFI and design the case around it. Duct tape the thing together and sell it at a reasonable price. You could even stuff it inside a brushed aluminum case with an apple sticker on the side and call it good.

The hilarious part that fanboys don't get is: Apple's parts are lower quality than the consumer computer component market (like stuff out of newegg) that sells for a fraction of the cost. Apple uses ***** hard drives (Maxtor/hitachi) and ***** RAM. They use THE WORST DVD burners (Sony). Their video cards are buggy/crappy (Radeon 2600) and outdated. Even their "custom" looking components have mass failure like their PSUs. And by the way, they charge more for it.

It's not entirely their fault. Apple's painted themselves into a corner by making these "sleek" formfactors that require custom parts. The more customized the parts, the smaller the scale of fabrication, and therefore the higher the price to produce and to develop (per unit). It also costs more to engineer (or re-engineer, as they often do), on top of re-certifying everything at every step through the FCC. Their custom cases and PSUs have to be run through the regulators with practically each new revision. I'm suggesting they abandon that model for the Mac Pro and just make an "unsexy" 'PC-style' high-quality, high-value box. It's what pro-sumers really want (high-power/quality, low price), abandons the "Sleekness" that is really extraneous to professionals, and has very little cost to create new revisions.

+1

[xgman]

+1

At the MP level, it's mostly really all about the OS when you get down to it. We're stuck here because of this.

[RT2020]

The Mac Mighty. 2.5'' hard drive bays, laptop RAM and GPU.

Sounds about right.

[slughead]

Pictorial explanation of my previous post:

http://latewire.com/images/fekken_random/new_mac_pro_idea.jpg?bypass=1

[mlts22]

My two cents:

Unless Apple changes the price point of the Mac Pro, here are the things I care about the most when paying the price premium for the machine:

1: Reliability. I am going to have the machine on 24/7 for years on end, and I likely will have it running several virtual machines on it (legacy Windows stuff.) Since this machine will be important as a daily machine, I like having server grade components, motherboards, design, and cooling. This is where Apple has excelled at historically.

2: Expandability. RAM is always needed, especially if you run virtual machines. If using a machine for gaming, being able to drop in a new video card in every couple years allows the machine to continue to run the sequels of Crysis. I tend to keep machines a long time, so I'd rather pay for a Mac Pro and keep it fairly up to date until it is completely obsolete as opposed to buying a new machine every 2-3 years.

3: Ability to use existing stuff. I don't feel like replacing my monitor, mouse, and keyboard unless I feel like it. I can just unplug all my USB devices (iPod, camera, phone, external HDD, etc.), drop the machine in, plug everything into it, and go from there.

4: Computer load. I would saturate an iMac's USB bus with all the USB stuff I have, while a Mac Pro with multiple USB cards (http://www.sonnettech.com/product/allegro_express_usb.html come to mind) can handle my external drives, and have another bus for low speed devices.

: Ironically, if you compare a Mac Pro to a comparable HP or Dell workstation class machine, you find Apple's machine is cheaper by a decent margin.

[nanofrog]

: Ironically, if you compare a Mac Pro to a comparable HP or Dell workstation class machine, you find Apple's machine is cheaper by a decent margin.
Try calling, as you get better pricing over the phone than what's advertised on the web configuration page.

And even the web pricing from Dell was cheaper than Apple for the Quads last I checked.

BTW, when comparing pricing, don't forget to add Apple Care to the MP, as Dell and HP's gear comes with 3yrs of On-Site support (no need to carry the thing into a store for repairs). Go 3rd party for add-ons (i.e. RAM, disks, RAID), as it's noticably cheaper.

[slughead]

Try calling, as you get better pricing over the phone than what's advertised on the web configuration page.

And even the web pricing from Dell was cheaper than Apple for the Quads last I checked.

BTW, when comparing pricing, don't forget to add Apple Care to the MP, as Dell and HP's gear comes with 3yrs of On-Site support (no need to carry the thing into a store for repairs). Go 3rd party for add-ons (i.e. RAM, disks, RAID), as it's noticably cheaper.

Thanks for looking that up. How the hell can a [bad] deal from 450 days ago be better than a current one in the computer industry? That wouldn't make sense.

[lemonade-maker]

Try calling, as you get better pricing over the phone than what's advertised on the web configuration page.

And even the web pricing from Dell was cheaper than Apple for the Quads last I checked.

BTW, when comparing pricing, don't forget to add Apple Care to the MP, as Dell and HP's gear comes with 3yrs of On-Site support (no need to carry the thing into a store for repairs). Go 3rd party for add-ons (i.e. RAM, disks, RAID), as it's noticably cheaper.

Ram and disks are a primary cause of failure. Going third party on these makes the onsite support almost useless. To get full value from onsite support, getting drives and ram at the time of purchase almost required. SAS drives from Dell are extremely expensive, but if four of eight fail they bring them onsite same day.

[nanofrog]

Thanks for looking that up. How the hell can a [bad] deal from 450 days ago be better than a current one in the computer industry? That wouldn't make sense.
For a MP, the main reason for buying at this point, is that a system is neededd NOW (i.e. new contract obtained, so a new employee is hired, and a system is required).

Another reason, is if a new system is needed, and another vendor's can't be used (i.e. extensive investment in OS X based software, and there's no budget for both training and equivalent software suites under a different OS).

Ram and disks are a primary cause of failure. Going third party on these makes the onsite support almost useless. To get full value from onsite support, getting drives and ram at the time of purchase almost required. SAS drives from Dell are extremely expensive, but if four of eight fail they bring them onsite same day.
In my experience, Disks yes. But I don't see RAM failing anywhere near the rate of mechanical HDD's. Graphics cards will fail more frequently as well.

But my comment was based on the fact that most of MR's members seem to be paying for their MP's themselves, so budgets are much tighter.

Corporations can plan for (and benefit) from a "One Stop" support source = system vendor, and purchase system upgrades at the time it's ordered. It does make things much easier. But even in the enterprise/corporate environment (corporate funds buy the system), there's still the possiblility that some necessary add-ons may not be offered from the vendor. As they tend to have full time IT staff, it falls on them to support that particular aspect of the system in the event of a hardware failure (i.e. specialty input device).

[mac daddy]

You can start with the fact it isn't intended to sit on your desk. So it isn't a desktop computer. There is longer list after that, but not particularly worth going into since missed that obvious one.

Someone notify Mac Rumors of this distinction, because the Mac Pro forum is a subset of the "Desktop" forum.

[slughead]

Someone notify Mac Rumors of this distinction, because the Mac Pro forum is a subset of the "Desktop" forum.

No kidding.

Also, the Macbook and Macbook Pro are not supposed to be used on your lap according to Apple. They are therefore "notebooks" and not "laptops".

http://www.apple.com/support/macbook/care/

"Do not place your MacBook on your lap or other body surface for extended periods of time. "

I don't know why he doesn't want to call the Mac Pro a desktop. Maybe it's something about saying it can't be compared to other "desktops" like the iMac/Mac Mini... I'm not sure what that does for you though. All that does is make the Mac Pro look like a worse value for being overpriced, underspeced, and without a small form-factor to redeem it.

[RubbishBBspeed]

Carbon fiber????????

Or Aluminium chassis with Black Glass side panels..... oh wait, wouldn't that just be like a giant iPhone 4......

Oh forgot Apple are playing the ole eco card. My guess then more of the Aluminium same or maybe just the apple designed cardboard box.