7/13: Air, Imac, or PRO!??

[TheLOGICalone]

Apple has created a pattern of releasing a new product every month during the past 3 months on the tuesday closest to the middle of the month; MacBook, MacBook pro, mac mini... And obviously the air iMac and mac pro are all overdue for an update, how do you think it will go down???

[Jayomat]

Apple has created a pattern of releasing a new product every month during the past 3 months on the tuesday closest to the middle of the month; MacBook, MacBook pro, mac mini... And obviously the air iMac and mac pro are all overdue for an update, how do you think it will go down???

obviously there is no air iMac... besides that, I don't understand your question^^^

[xgman]

I don't know, but I'm getting so sick of waiting for this. Any Mac release now that comes before the Mac Pro really is adding insult to injury. :mad: Oh, and by the way, I personally think they will silently discontinue the Air and possibly come out later next year with an already suggested "ipad pro" version that runs more Mac style apps in some way.

[TheLOGICalone]

Based on Apple's update methodology this summer a Mac computer has been updated every month on the Tuesday that falls closest to the middle of the month...

April 13th - MacBook Pro
May 18th - MacBook
June 15th - Mac Mini
July 13th - ????
August 17th - ????
September 14th - ????



I'm really hoping for mac pro, just wanna see what others think...

[TheLOGICalone]

I don't know, but I'm getting so sick of waiting for this. Any Mac release now that comes before the Mac Pro really is adding insult to injury. :mad: Oh, and by the way, I personally think they will silently discontinue the Air and possibly come out later next year with an already suggested "ipad pro" version that runs more Mac style apps in some way.

I agree 100%, if anything gets updated before mac pro there will be a small riot...

[rajbonham]

Haha, I can't wait to hear the crying on here when nothing gets updated on Tuesday. I stopped stressing out every Tuesday, about a month ago. It wasn't worth the continual disappointment.

[TheLOGICalone]

Haha, I can't wait to hear the crying on here when nothing gets updated on Tuesday. I stopped stressing out every Tuesday, about a month ago. It wasn't worth the continual disappointment.

So, you think there won't be any update of any kind on tuesday? It seems like apple is starting to systematically update everything, but maybe the pattern is just a coincidence, I'm just trying to hang on to any sliver of hope I can find, lol.

[oilfighter]

I'm going to ease everyone's eventual disappointment and say nothing will happen till September, when all the iPods get a refresh. So, brace yourself for more disappointment next Tuesday.

(I'm impatiently waiting for a Mac Pro too)

[mwayne85]

Out of those three, the Mac Pro is the most out of date.

Last Mac Pro update: 3/2009
Last Air update: 6/2009
Last iMac update: 10/2009

It's been too damn long.

[xgman]

The only small hope that we have seen since those unfounded March rumors, is the fact that their are Mac pro capable new vid card drivers inside the new mac mini OS update. At least something is seemingly on the drawing board development wise. I mean why else even insert these driver profiles in there otherwise. Now the question is how long prior to release do these show up. It could still be months away. One thing Apple has shown is that they have little concern for how fast non apple technology updates move, especially with regard to video cards, so we really don't know. Still . . . . . . it's at least something . . .

[TheLOGICalone]

I'd love to see if a premature driver(s) has been buried in a previous release some time in the past and if so, how long it took for the primary computer it was associated with to be updated...

[ValSalva]

There's also the option that Apple won't update anything and there's at least a 50% chance of that if not more.

I'm less and less optimistic of any 2010 Mac Pro. It will only be four months from now that Sandy Bridge is announced with it likely shipping in Q1. Maybe this is what Apple is waiting for.

I think Apple will let the Air die because of the iPad. The next most likely update is the iMac.

[TheLOGICalone]

There's also the option that Apple won't update anything and there's at least a 50% chance of that if not more.

I'm less and less optimistic of any 2010 Mac Pro. It will only be four months from now that Sandy Bridge is announced with it likely shipping in Q1. Maybe this is what Apple is waiting for.

I think Apple will let the Air die because of the iPad. The next most likely update is the iMac.

If they updated the iMac before pro I'd probably burst a blood vessel somewhere.

[xgman]

There's also the option that Apple won't update anything and there's at least a 50% chance of that if not more.

I'm less and less optimistic of any 2010 Mac Pro. It will only be four months from now that Sandy Bridge is announced with it likely shipping in Q1. Maybe this is what Apple is waiting for.

I think Apple will let the Air die because of the iPad. The next most likely update is the iMac.

You do understand that the Sandy Bridge Mac Pro (if there even is one) won't come till 2012 right? Even if Sandy Bridge is released this fall, I wouldn't hold my breath on Apple till very late 2011. I can't imagine they don't take the 6 core chip jump soon. I imagine they have been waiting for significant numbers in the supply line of the xeon parts even if I have my suspicion otherwise. It may be as simple as clearing old stock, and I was thinking about why they wouldn't lower prices to clear some 2009 stock, and it occurred to me that if they did, the new MP's pricing would see so much higher than the current models that the average buyer may be put off in Apples mind. Anyway, who knows . . . .

[xgman]

If they updated the iMac before pro I'd probably burst a blood vessel somewhere.

Don't get me started. :mad: Hasn't the imac already been updated once during this wait? It's been so long I can't remember.

[iMacmatician]

So, you think there won't be any update of any kind on tuesday? It seems like apple is starting to systematically update everything, but maybe the pattern is just a coincidence, I'm just trying to hang on to any sliver of hope I can find, lol.There was a time early in 2008 when there was a small update to some Apple product each week for about 4 weeks.

I'm less and less optimistic of any 2010 Mac Pro. It will only be four months from now that Sandy Bridge is announced with it likely shipping in Q1. Maybe this is what Apple is waiting for.Those Sandy Bridge CPUs are mainstream chips, the server ones are coming in Q3 2011.

[Ravich]

I'll take a Mac Pro update or a pro addition to the iMac line. Either one will do. Please just let it not be the air.

[TheLOGICalone]

I just can't wait for a 3.33 6 core mac pro- it's a great combo of speed and cores, 6 memory slots would rule, more power for gpus 485/5xx, 5980/southern island in a mac pro and drivers to run them!, new cinema display... But I'm rambling again...

[Cindori]

Out of those three, the Mac Pro is the most out of date.

Last Mac Pro update: 3/2009
Last Air update: 6/2009
Last iMac update: 10/2009

It's been too damn long.

Why do people keep insisting that last update was in the beginning of 2009? There has been a speed bump to 3.33GHz since then. It should count as an update.

[xgman]

Why do people keep insisting that last update was in the beginning of 2009? There has been a speed bump to 3.33GHz since then. It should count as an update.

If you say so. I guess apple shares this view, but we are talking a real platform update here, like from 2008 to 2009 style.

[TheLOGICalone]

Why do people keep insisting that last update was in the beginning of 2009? There has been a speed bump to 3.33GHz since then. It should count as an update.

I think we have been infiltrated by an iMac/mac book air user! Lol jk, but seriously how can that possibly count?

[Ravich]

I am guessing people dont count it because it only adds the option to upgrade for significant cost? Rather than upping the base specs.

[xgman]

By the way, I guess Moores law is officially dead? I mean hasn't 3.33 been about the top speed for 2-3 years now? I guess more cores, but even that is sloooow coming.

[mwayne85]

Why do people keep insisting that last update was in the beginning of 2009? There has been a speed bump to 3.33GHz since then. It should count as an update.

If adding one more CPU option is considered the Mac Pro 2010 update, well that's pretty pathetic.

[ValSalva]

If they updated the iMac before pro I'd probably burst a blood vessel somewhere.

I know the feeling :eek:

[TheLOGICalone]

By the way, I guess Moores law is officially dead? I mean hasn't 3.33 been about the top speed for 2-3 years now? I guess more cores, but even that is sloooow coming.

I think it's Moore(pun) about the removing bottlenecks in the architecture than increasing clock speed, like how 2008 3.8? Is slower than 2009 2.93 or something, also don't the extremes auto overclock? But that said, I'd love to break the 4ghz barrier on a mac...

[fearoftigers]

Mac Pro please!

[strausd]

I'm going to ease everyone's eventual disappointment and say nothing will happen till September, when all the iPods get a refresh. So, brace yourself for more disappointment next Tuesday.

(I'm impatiently waiting for a Mac Pro too)

Why would you think september? Thats their big iPod month and when iPad will get 4.0. When the keynote for WWDC was on, all it talked about was iOS 4, no Mac Pro. I don't see why they would update their most powerful computer the same time they update their little iPods. But this is Apple, nobody knows.

Why do people keep insisting that last update was in the beginning of 2009? There has been a speed bump to 3.33GHz since then. It should count as an update.

Personally, I don't consider adding a single new option to a computer to be an update to the whole line.

[Heilage]

Why do people keep insisting that last update was in the beginning of 2009? There has been a speed bump to 3.33GHz since then. It should count as an update.

Actually, Apple still call it the "Early 2009" Mac Pro. There are no newer models in the database, so the speed bump doesn't count.

Whatever I might think about the Mac Pro, it hasn't gotten an update for a long, long time.

[iMacmatician]

By the way, I guess Moores law is officially dead? I mean hasn't 3.33 been about the top speed for 2-3 years now? I guess more cores, but even that is sloooow coming.Moore's law is about transistor counts not clock speeds. Microarchitectural improvements in a core tend to increase the size of the core, so that's a reason for the gradual increase in core counts (also previously external components such as an integrated GPU are being placed on the CPU package or die).

I think it's Moore(pun) about the removing bottlenecks in the architecture than increasing clock speed, like how 2008 3.8? Is slower than 2009 2.93 or something, also don't the extremes auto overclock? But that said, I'd love to break the 4ghz barrier on a mac...Besides clock speed there are per-core improvements and core count increases, and Intel has done both in the last few generations of their CPUs. Bottlenecks have been reduced by features such as QuickPath.

[TheLOGICalone]

Moore's law is about transistor counts not clock speeds. Microarchitectural improvements in a core tend to increase the size of the core, so that's a reason for the gradual increase in core counts (also previously external components such as an integrated GPU are being placed on the CPU package or die).

Besides clock speed there are per-core improvements and core count increases, and Intel has done both in the last few generations of their CPUs. Bottlenecks have been reduced by features such as QuickPath.

Well, you seem to have some knowledge on the subject, when if ever will we see 4,5,6 ghz processors?

[Mackilroy]

Well, you seem to have some knowledge on the subject, when if ever will we see 4,5,6 ghz processors?
You can already see those - you just don't see them from the factory that way. Well, for 4 and 5 GHz, at least. Don't think anybody's reached 6 GHz yet.

[TheLOGICalone]

You can already see those - you just don't see them from the factory that way. Well, for 4 and 5 GHz, at least. Don't think anybody's reached 6 GHz yet.

That's funny I was just researching OC ing mac pros, do you have any good links with more info?

[Mackilroy]

No. Sans the 2006 Mac Pro, as far as I'm aware overclocking Macs isn't really possible. With a PC it's extremely easy (or a hackintosh), but not Macs.

[underblu]

If you look at the specs of the MacPro the 8 core machine is still plenty fast for many pro applications.

The issue I would have with Apple is that they are essentially charging the same amount for technology that is over a year old. While on the open market the value of technology -this technology (CPUs Video Cards etc) has significantly diminished over time.

Therefore anyone buying a MacPro today is receiving substantially less value than the buyer who purchased a Mac Pro back in 3/09.

Why Apple won't implement a sliding price structure tied to the actual market prices they are paying for this technology contained in their Pro line is beyond me. This would provide value fairness to their pro customers who wish to upgrade later in Apple's upgrade cycle while not altering their original profit margins in the least.

[xgman]

Moore's law is about transistor counts not clock speeds. Microarchitectural improvements in a core tend to increase the size of the core, so that's a reason for the gradual increase in core counts (also previously external components such as an integrated GPU are being placed on the CPU package or die).

Besides clock speed there are per-core improvements and core count increases, and Intel has done both in the last few generations of their CPUs. Bottlenecks have been reduced by features such as QuickPath.

Nevertheless, overall computing speed hasn't doubled every xx months or whatever it states as far as I can tell. Maybe supercomputers.

[xgman]

Why Apple won't implement a sliding price structure tied to the actual market prices they are paying for this technology contained in their Pro line is beyond me. This would provide value fairness to their pro customers who wish to upgrade later in Apple's upgrade cycle while not altering their original profit margins in the least.

again, I suspect that they keep the prices high so it doesn't appear that the new models are way above what the older model was selling at. It makes new purchasers feel like they are getting more for the same money or something like that.

[xgman]

That's funny I was just researching OC ing mac pros, do you have any good links with more info?


Sorry for the triple post (yes, I know I can combine), but anyway you can overclock the 2008 mac pro with a zdnet utility, even in Snow Leopard. It's not quite like in PC's since it just zooms everything up and the memory becomes the limit, especially since you can't increase the voltages like you would on a PC, but it does work until system shut down. I think they stopped updating it after 2008 so 2009 probably doesn't work.

[Ravich]

again, I suspect that they keep the prices high so it doesn't appear that the new models are way above what the older model was selling at. It makes new purchasers feel like they are getting more for the same money or something like that.
This. Lowering prices on existing products would mean a price hike whenever the update happens. No one would be happy about that.

[Mackilroy]

Sorry for the triple post (yes, I know I can combine), but anyway you can overclock the 2008 mac pro with a zdnet utility, even in Snow Leopard.

I thought that was for the 2006 models only. So it works on 2008 machines too?