Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac Pro

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jun 23, 2013, 08:51 PM   #1
Radiating
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
People Who Complain About the New Mac Pro Misunderstand It

I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding about most of the compalints about the new Mac Pro.

Before we begin though let's address the cost, thunderbolt expansion is expensive because it's new not because it's expensive to make. I own an Sonnet Echo Express Pro, that cost me upwards of $700. The parts that go into it are marked up over 800% and the market will tank in price very quickly considering you can buy the pcie to thunderbolt controllers for $80 right now, but Intel won't let consumers buy them, only manufacturers.

The first thing to understand about Apple's New Mac Pro is that it had to have a single processor, the chipset only supported a single processor at this time with thunderbolt, so if Apple wanted thunderbolt they had to go with a single processor. However you can have up to 6 external Xeon Phi co-processors, and the single processor has as many cores and is faster than the dual processors it replaces.

Second, Apple had to go with Firepros instead of Nvidia cards, AMD is far less interested in marking up their workstation cards, and sure you don't get CUDA core support, but if you did then you'd be paying $2000 more for the machine. Instead now you can have both the internal GPUs and up to SIX external ones. I've attatched a GeForce Titan with a PCIe to Thunderbolt adapter and VisionTek 3.5" 450w stand alone power supply to practically every Mac that Apple makes that has thunderbolt and it works extremely well. If you're actualy running applications that need CUDA cores, having 6 external cards sold at market price is a huge blessing, over 2 internal ones that are sold at a mark up.

Third, external PCI cards, external hard drives, and external optical drives are the way of the future. Why?

Flexibility:



The last generation Mac Pro had to make an educated guess on how much EMPTY space you needed, and when you were done using that empty space, there was NOTHING that you could do to expand it without an engineering degree and a manufacturing plant. Apple had to guess that you needed 4 PCIe slots, if you needed 5, well too bad, and if you didn't need those slots you were wasting space.

The new Mac Pro does away with the guessing game and gives you the option of nearly unlimited expandability. You can have up to 72 PCIe slots now (6x dual pcie boxes per cable), which is 18 times as many, and up to 300 hard drive arrays or optical drives, which is 75 times, and 150 times more respectivly. And guess what, the Mac Pro is smaller. How is that not revolutionary?


Fourth, issues have come up about: Clutter. Cables, Mess, Junk. Hoestly I think this is a very short sighted issue. If it REALLY bothers you that much, then just buy a recycled Mac Pro case off eBay for $100 and some zip ties you can have all the internal parts you want. However, I haven't heard of a Mac Mini or an iMac user complaining, and guess what? Companies will come up with neat little solutions to package all of your external devices around the new Mac Pro, and here's the thing, if you ever decide that you need even more room, you won't be SOL, you'll simply buy a new dock or stand for your Mac Pro with more room.


The new Mac Pro is about flexibility and scalability, unlike the last version which was one size fits all that didn't really do a good job at fitting anyone except the exact person who needs 4 hard drives, 2 optical drives and 4 PCI slots exactly.




The Mac Pro is the next evolution of the desktop format.

Finally, the biggest issue of all, performance the new Mac Pro can meet the needs of literally anyone who owned the last generation Mac Pro, every single performance and expandability criteria is higher. Everything you could do with the last model, you can do equally or better with the new one.



You'll notice that not only are all performance metrics improved across the board, all of your expandability capabilities are improved across the board. Instead of having 2 PCIe 2.0 x16 slots used normally for the graphics cards, you have 2 PCIe 3.0 x16 slots used normally for graphics. Instead of 4 PCIe 2.0 lanes for expandability (shared between slots 3 & 4) you have 3 PCIe 2.0 lanes shared between 6 thunderbolt cables. That's 3 times the expandability before we consider daisy chaining, and you can use full x16 cards at x4 speeds just like before. On top of that there are several Mini PCIe connectors internally, not to mention USB 3.0.

Last edited by Radiating; Jul 1, 2013 at 02:15 AM.
Radiating is offline   23 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 09:13 PM   #2
wonderspark
macrumors 68030
 
wonderspark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Why are you trying so hard? What do you care?

I've seen the attempts that were made to max out Thunderbolt, and seen how no matter how many of those Promise Pegasus RAID boxes they attached, they maxed out around 1000MB/sec. Has that been changed? If so, I'd love to see it, and the accompanying price tag to make that work. Those external TB expansion boxes are something like $800-$1000, when my current PCI RAID card is much, much faster today, now, in an old Mac Pro.

I think *you* misunderstand the situation. Today, I'd have to spend at least $1000 to have worse performance, or perhaps multiple thousands for equal performance. Screw that.
__________________
Wait a second... So you're telling me anything that happens in the sky is legal, and there's a giant crime-blimp flying around this place? I don't know how I missed that.
wonderspark is offline   19 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 09:33 PM   #3
macuser453787
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ephesians 2:1-10
Quote:
Originally Posted by wonderspark View Post
...when my current PCI RAID card is much, much faster today, now, in an old Mac Pro.
An interesting point, and one that I've wondered about and found myself leaning towards, especially since PCIe is a very mature, well-established technology with a plethora of options in the market. If I recall correctly, don't you get something along the lines of 1100+ mb/s with your setup?
macuser453787 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 09:47 PM   #4
wonderspark
macrumors 68030
 
wonderspark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Quote:
Originally Posted by macuser453787 View Post
An interesting point, and one that I've wondered about and found myself leaning towards, especially since PCIe is a very mature, well-established technology with a plethora of options in the market. If I recall correctly, don't you get something along the lines of 1100+ mb/s with your setup?
Yes, with only half the available drive slots filled with old HDD tech, I got 1101MB/second using AJA System Test. That's nowhere near the limit of my x8 lane Areca card!
__________________
Wait a second... So you're telling me anything that happens in the sky is legal, and there's a giant crime-blimp flying around this place? I don't know how I missed that.
wonderspark is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 09:51 PM   #5
artherd
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
I regularly get 2,200MB/second (to/from disk) out of Mac Pros. Try that with Thunderchicken.
artherd is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 10:03 PM   #6
JesterJJZ
macrumors 68000
 
JesterJJZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Last I checked, Xeon Phi doesn't work on Mac. Even if it did, not sure it would even be worth it over Thunderbolt.
__________________
jesterpictures.com theoryiseverything.com jarek.com
Shoot for the Impossible...Then do it
MacPro 12core, 64GB, GTX680, 30" ACD, 23" ACD -- 15" MBP 2.6 i7, Anti-Glare, 16GB, 240GB SSD + 1TB
JesterJJZ is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 10:03 PM   #7
wonderspark
macrumors 68030
 
wonderspark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Denver, CO
I would guess that with all six TB ports running all three TB controllers to a large pile of disks, the next Mac Pro could see about 4000MB/second, but that is with a lot of money wasted to make it happen.

A single Areca RAID card can do 8000MB/sec with PCIe v3, and 4000MB/sec in v2 today, and that card is only $1250. (1882ix-24, x8 lane PCIe 3.0)

With any luck, TB will actually go optical (as it was intended) instead of copper. Then, perhaps it will be a real improvement.
__________________
Wait a second... So you're telling me anything that happens in the sky is legal, and there's a giant crime-blimp flying around this place? I don't know how I missed that.

Last edited by wonderspark; Jun 24, 2013 at 02:30 AM.
wonderspark is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 10:11 PM   #8
tjlazer
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
Send a message via ICQ to tjlazer Send a message via Yahoo to tjlazer
No we understand it completely. Apple made a mistake and should call the new machine a super Mac Mini. Then they should read all the complaints and concentrate on designing a new Mac Pro.
__________________
--
Mac Pro 4,1, Hex 3.20 GHz, 16GB, 2TB, ATI 5870 1GB, SL
iMac 24", 2.4GHz, 4GB, 500GB HD, ML
Powerbook G3 Bronze, 333MHz, 512MB, 40GB HD, OS 9.22
tjlazer is offline   13 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 10:14 PM   #9
barkmonster
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Lancashire
Magma and a few other companies have offered expansion systems for years, going back to the PCI days, let alone PCIe. A pre-2013 Mac Pro could just use one of those systems to add unlimited PCIe expansion and it wouldn't be limited to either 10Gbit/s or dual 10Gbit/s per channel like Thunderbolt.

The cheapest Thunderbolt system I've seen to add even 3 PCIe slots and 3 SATA drive bays including internal power connectors for PCIe cards is a system from Sonnet that costs nearly 1000 without cabling or a SATA 6Gb/s PCIe card.
__________________
16Gb iPhone 5 2.53Ghz Mac Mini (8Gb, 60Gb Vertex 2) Icy Box IB-328U3SEb with Toshiba DT01ACA300 HDD
Mbox2 LG W2343T Samsung SyncMaster 913n
barkmonster is online now   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 10:32 PM   #10
relimw
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: SC
Quote:
Originally Posted by JesterJJZ View Post
Last I checked, Xeon Phi doesn't work on Mac. Even if it did, not sure it would even be worth it over Thunderbolt.
Since nobody has pointed out that the Phi's are x16 PCIe2, I guess I will
So at most, you would be able to run 3 of those cards. The same goes for the Red Rocket.
__________________
Powerbook 1Ghz 17"
Mac Mini 1.42GHz; 1GB RAM; AE+BT
Mac Mini 1.42GHz; 1GB RAM
Mac Pro 3GHz; 12GB; x1900; AE+BT
relimw is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 11:12 PM   #11
echoout
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Austin, Texas
My somewhat significant experience with Thunderbolt is that daisy-chaining suuuucks. One device gets powered down, another loses a signal, etc. and you don't typically want to put a RAID in a situation where it accidentally powers off. There have also been some issues with device traffic making monitors flicker. Not to mentioned the decrease in performance when multiple high-speed data devices are sharing bandwidth. Fun times.

Seems like 6 TB2 ports isn't all that much when you consider 2 to 3 monitors, a couple RAIDs, an enclosure with 10Gbe NIC and some legacy cards, etc.

My surprise on a TB video production setup was how much had to be replaced by TB-compliant versions of cards I already owned. My Magma chassis with ATTO 10Gbe NIC, Sonnet PCIe SSD RAID and Blackmagic capture card (and cables!) were NOT cheap.

I dunno, this just seems like a cluster. I understand the new Mac Pro quite well, maybe better than most having worked off TB on a huge project over 7 months. That experience and seeing what else is out there makes me pretty weary.
echoout is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 02:01 AM   #12
beelzebubba
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
We haven't had any issues taking cards that were in a Magma and using them in the Sonnet bays though not every type of card is being transitioned. While the canister is interesting to me it will be a version or so before I'd put it in production. Notwithstanding our 2014 budget is likely going in before it ships. One of the primary software vendors in our space usually doesn't offer upgrades to the latest hardware right away and when they do it's a couple of months before they get it stable and consistent enough to use in production. There are still guys using G4s and G5s in systems that have been working and profitable for years. They are one trick ponies in that all they do is that one app but they are fully functional, have acceptable performance and are stable. In fact we just replaced the last of our G5s not because they didn't work but because the software vendor ended support for the PPC version of the vertical app we were using more than a year ago.

One would think that given the Final Cut debacle that they'd be more aware of any impact on the user base and work harder to make sure any transition issues, at least on the hardware side, were minimized.
beelzebubba is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 02:09 AM   #13
GermanyChris
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Here
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radiating View Post
I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding about most of the compalints about the new Mac Pro.
You have a fundamental misunderstanding, It doesn't meet my and others current needs and will not for the foreseeable future, much like the rMBP.
GermanyChris is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 03:07 AM   #14
mif
macrumors Demi-God
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: home
I won't complain and i won't buy.

iMacified.
__________________
"Every day, in every way, i am feeling better and better" - Dreyfus
mif is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 03:19 AM   #15
xSinghx
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Bla Bla Bla - Spin spin spin - tail wagging the dog is good.

"Four legs good, two legs better!"

When will the Orwellian double speak end.
__________________
2008 Mac Pro, 2 x 3GHz, 32GB RAM, ATI 5870, 2010 15" MacBook Pro, 2.6GHz i7, 8GB RAM
xSinghx is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 03:33 AM   #16
ratsg
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
I'm planning to buy one, but only because I'm in the market for a Mac Mini Pro.

If I needed a Mac Pro, I'd be p155ed as he11.
ratsg is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 03:34 AM   #17
drsox
macrumors 65816
 
drsox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Xhystos
Quote:
Originally Posted by xSinghx View Post
Bla Bla Bla - Spin spin spin - tail wagging the dog is good.

"Four legs good, two legs better!"

When will the Orwellian double speak end.
And your point is ?
__________________
2014 13in MBA, 2014 i7 Mini, 2011 13in MBA, iPad2, iPhone5, iPhone4S.
Sonos System, NTV550s, ReadyNASs.
drsox is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 04:37 AM   #18
ValSalva
macrumors 68040
 
ValSalva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Burpelson AFB
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radiating View Post
The Mac Pro is the future of computing.
The market will determine that. Hopefully it's not way too expensive and it doesn't have too many inevitable version 1.0 teething problems. I'm just glad Apple is pumping so much effort into the Mac platform.
ValSalva is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 11:41 AM   #19
Radiating
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanyChris View Post
You have a fundamental misunderstanding, It doesn't meet my and others current needs and will not for the foreseeable future, much like the rMBP.
How does the new Mac Pro not meet your current needs? The new Mac Pro is better in literally every single performance and expandaility criteria a computer can possibly have compared to the computer it replaces. Literally every performance criteria is better.

Processor:

Max Processor Performance: 10% faster than last gen 12 core (1x 12 core X2697 vs 2x 6 core X5675)
Max Cores: Same (12)
Max Processor Power Consumption: 30% lower

Ram:

Max Ram: Same (128GB)
Max Ram Speed: 40% better, 1,866MHz vs 1333 MHz

Storage:

Max Storage: 20 times greater volume
Max single drive storage throughput: Same 2000 MB/s+ with OCZ Z-Drive, PCIe disk over thunderbolt or pcie.
Max multi drive storage throughput (real world acheivable): 156% faster, 15,600 MB/s vs 10,000 MB/s (6x thunderbolt aggregation vs 16x PCIe), using SSDs in various RAID configurations.

PCI Express Expansion:

Max no. of PCIe expansion: 10 times greater, 40 (2 pcie mini slots (internal, hard drives), 2 pcie 16x slots for video cards (need to remove video cards to use), 6 thunderbolt ports (each physically supporting 6 16x cards) vs 4 (4 pcie slots (1-2 taken up by video card)
Max no. of PCIe cards with default dual graphics and storage: 18 times greater, 36 vs 2.

Graphics:

Max: Around 3.5 times greater, 2x W9000 + 6x Tesla K20 or Titan vs 2x K20/Titan

If the new Mac Pro doesn't meet your needs when the old one did, then your needs must be imaginary.

Last edited by Radiating; Jun 24, 2013 at 12:01 PM.
Radiating is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 11:53 AM   #20
HurryKayne
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
First of all sorry because i haven't the time to read the posts above,
i will do it later meanwhile i apologize.
I have to say that i won't ever buy a machine like this to game on.
Eventually i could too but not the main purpose i will buy it for.
I will buy it to eat and crunch lots of datas as quickly as possibile.
To play games i'd rather go to PS4 or XboxOne..don't wanna lose time
with installations,problems,drivers etc etc and 1920x1080 are more than enough for me..i won't spend my life making counts on how many frames Crisys is losing at 4K.
Even for work i splitted in two,for light jobs i use my Ipad mini,for heavy ones my MacBook Pro 15 ..then once back at home i load all on my Imac.
The only thing i concern is ..the price..if its more than 2500 euros for the entry one..i won't approach its buying but i'll rather wait for its 2015 iteration.
Have a nice day....gotta rush again.
bye.
HurryKayne is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 11:58 AM   #21
GermanyChris
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Here
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radiating View Post
How does the new Mac Pro not meet your current needs? The new Mac Pro is better in literally every single performance and expandaility criteria a computer can possibly have compared to the computer it replaces. Literally every performance criteria is better.

Processor:

Max Processor Performance: 10% faster than last gen 12 core (1x 12 core X2697 vs 2x 6 core X5675)
Max Cores: Same (12)
Max Processor Power Consumption: 30% lower

Ram:

Max Ram: Same (128GB)
Max Ram Speed: 40% better, 1,866MHz vs 1333 MHz

Storage:

Max Storage: 20 times greater volume
Max single drive storage throughput: Same 2000 MB/s+ with OCZ Z-Drive, PCIe disk over thunderbolt or pcie.
Max multi drive storage throughput (real world acheivable): 156% faster, 15,600 MB/s vs 10,000 MB/s (6x thunderbolt aggregation vs 16x PCIe), using SSDs in various RAID configurations.

PCI Express:

Max no. of PCIe interfaces: 10 times greater, 40 (2 for drives, 2 for video cards, 6 thunderbolt (each physically supporting 6 cards for a total 36 16x cards that can be installed) vs 4 (4 pcie slots)
Max no. of PCIe cards with default dual graphics and storage: 18 times greater, 36 vs 2.

Graphics:

Max: Around 3.5 times greater, 2x W9000 + 6x Tesla K20 or Titan vs 2x K20/Titan

If the new Mac Pro doesn't meet your needs when the old one did, then your needs must be imaginary.
1866 adds virtually no performance boost. To get to 128 I need to buy DIMM's that run 700 to 1K each

If I want big fast external storage thats what SAS and Fiber are for.

Max number of PCI interfaces are greater but also slower, and your forgetting existing PCI expansion boxes for those that need/want it.

I can run two w9000's now, and if you''d like to run 1K+ graphics cards at a 1/4 to 1/2 speed fell free. Again slow external graphics bring nothing new to the table.

Lets not count my 15TB internal, and 20TB external. I still have and use daily all my optical drives (2 internal and 2 external).

It doesn't meet my needs, I'm glad you like it please buy an extra one in my name please, It'll make Jobs' ghost happy.
GermanyChris is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 12:02 PM   #22
barmann
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radiating View Post
How does the new Mac Pro not meet your current needs?

If the new Mac Pro doesn't meet your needs when the old one did, then your needs must be imaginary.
You kinda should read the hundreds of postings detailing those needs, the ones made since the announcement .
__________________
MacPro 2.8 Octo 3.1 / MBP 15" 4.1 / MBA 11.6" ultimate
barmann is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 12:06 PM   #23
GermanyChris
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Here
Quote:
Originally Posted by barmann View Post
You kinda should read the hundreds of postings detailing those needs, the ones made since the announcement .
reading unimportant, we just "misunderstand"
GermanyChris is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 12:38 PM   #24
xSinghx
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by drsox View Post
And your point is ?
It's not obvious?
__________________
2008 Mac Pro, 2 x 3GHz, 32GB RAM, ATI 5870, 2010 15" MacBook Pro, 2.6GHz i7, 8GB RAM
xSinghx is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 12:41 PM   #25
Radiating
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanyChris View Post
1866 adds virtually no performance boost. To get to 128 I need to buy DIMM's that run 700 to 1K each
If you're using any application that needs 128GB of ram then you can afford to spend $2000 more to get the new 32GB dimms which will come down in price soon enough.

Quote:
If I want big fast external storage thats what SAS and Fiber are for.
The new Mac Pro supports SAS and Fiber just like the old one did. In fact thunderbolt fiber chanel cards are the same price as PCIe fiber chanel cards $600 (Apple Fiber Chanel card vs Promise Thunderbolt Fiber Chanel Box)

Quote:
Max number of PCI interfaces are greater but also slower, and your forgetting existing PCI expansion boxes for those that need/want it.
6 4x interfaces that can be aggregated are better than 4 16x interfaces that cannot be aggregated. 95% of PCIe cards do not use 16x, and even the ones that do like RAID cards and Video cards do not make use of more than 4x over 99% of the time. I benchmarked RAID cards and a GeForce Titan over thunderbolt and even though both cards needed 16x for a few brief micro second, the performance hit was less than the typical sample to sample variation from card to card, most cards simply do not need 16x and will see very little performance hit when run at 4x.

For the extremely rare very high end application that actually NEED 16x to the point where it creates meaningful slow downs, thunderbolt supports aggregation, meaning you can use all 6 of those thunderbolt cables to get 24x PCIe speed.

Thunderbolt is better for rare high end applications and better for being able to do more stuff.

Quote:
I can run two w9000's now, and if you''d like to run 1K+ graphics cards at a 1/4 to 1/2 speed fell free. Again slow external graphics bring nothing new to the table.
Again I have an Echo Express Pro, and a GeForce Titan, and I've run them over a single thunderbolt 1 cable. There is no 1/2 or 1/4 slow down, the slow down is within the size of the sample variation from card to card, meaning it matters more what week your card was made then if it's over thunderbolt 1 or internal pcie 16x according to the passmark database.

Quote:
Lets not count my 15TB internal, and 20TB external. I still have and use daily all my optical drives (2 internal and 2 external).
Thew New Mac Pro can support 35 TB, and 4 optical drives just fine, and do way more.

Quote:
It doesn't meet my needs, I'm glad you like it please buy an extra one in my name please, It'll make Jobs' ghost happy.
You seem to have this misunderstanding of the capabilities of the new Mac Pro. It is more capable than the old version.

Last edited by Radiating; Jun 24, 2013 at 12:46 PM.
Radiating is offline   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac Pro

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
iPad: People love to complain about anything MN7119 iPad 13 Nov 1, 2013 05:27 PM
Why do some people constantly complain about Apple? tymaster50 iPhone 44 Oct 27, 2012 10:22 AM
Why people complain so much? SuperMiguel iPhone 2 Oct 1, 2012 06:23 AM
WOW lots of people complain about the new iPhone 5 DBZmusicboy01 iPhone 23 Sep 14, 2012 08:10 PM
iPhone 5: People DIDN'T complain about the first three's designs. Shane2100AD iPhone 72 Sep 4, 2012 12:37 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:36 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC