8-Core Mac Pro In January? Displays Too?

[dante@sisna.com]

Multimedia, Myself and Others.

Yes, or you might want to skip the mental illness, piety, shrillness and intellectual fascism in that thread and just buy it when it comes out if you have the money and need it. Life is too short to share in the madness of fools.

You have to understand that Multimedia, myself, Applied Visual and others have been taking a beating in the 8 Core forum for months now on the topic of "usefulness of 8 core macs for current production workflows."

We are all hardcore production users of the current Quad Core machines and we fully utilize their power with Applications that both are and are not multithreaded -- in either instance the Quad Core is a huge imporvement over any single or dual core machines.

So forgive us if we are a bit touchy on this subject.

And besides, a forum is "not the madness of fools," it is a place to share ideas and learn -- You and others are right to suggest however, that the way, manner, and sensitivity as to how we do this is important.

Just my thoughts.

Dante

 

[MacinDoc]

If apple releases a 50" monitor, it would be crazy. If you connect a mac pro (or any other mac) to a 50" HD TV the picture quality is...umm horrid, as I've heard. So Apple would have to make it possible for Mac OSX to look good on a huge monitor.

IIRC, Apple has been granted a patent for a means of providing resolution-independent scaling of graphics. In fact, is that not supposed to be a feature of OS X 10.5?

 

[electronbee]

delete

 

[ChrisA]

I would hardly call a system where you can stuff 8GB into it "mid-range", that's pretty high-end. I think that's asking a bit much, particularly when other parts of the system are expensive, cutting out one CPU and halving the memory capacity doesn't drop the cost in half.

I guess I've been a Sun customer for to long. Sun calls such a system "entry level" and sells it for $895. Sun calls it the "Ultra 20 Workstation". For the $895 price you get only 512MB RAM and a low end graphic card but the Ultra 20 can be configured with 8GB of RAM, a Quadro FX 1500 and a faster dual core Operteron.

I think it is fair to compare Sun and Apple. Both companies make well built, first class UNIX based workstations. Their company headquarters or not far apart. And both companies make the "whole stack" that is the computer, the OS and many of the applications. No one thinks of Sun as "value priced" yet their entry level workstation is under $1K and is a 64-bit dual core machine.

Apple should be able to match what Sun has done.

 

[IlluminatedSage]

i hope they also add Blu-ray as an option for the new mac pro's

as well as new HDCP compliant video cards. which can also possibly drive HDMI outputs.
anything that will allow high end video/audio.

i would love to get that.

 

[cw2k]

as well as new HDCP compliant video cards.

The stock 7300gt in the current Mac Pro is already seems to be fully HDCP compliant (I have tested it and found it works in WinXP with PowerDVD and an HD-DVD via DVI)

 

[AidenShaw]

Modern flat panels make excellent monitors.

If apple releases a 50" monitor, it would be crazy.

If you connect a mac pro (or any other mac) to a 50" HD TV the picture quality is...umm horrid, as I've heard.

This was true for old CRT televisions (especially when you had to convert the VGA signal to PAL or NTSC), but new LCD/Plasma with VGA/DVI/HDMI inputs are basically the same as monitors. They have a native resolution (1920x1080 for 1080p), and like other LCD panels, look best at that native resolution.

I have a 46" Samsung 1080p connected to a Quadro in a Vista Media Center Edition pc, and the monitor quality is superb (as well as the video quality).

Like another post said, however, I don't have the 46" on my desk, 40cm from my eyes. It has the same width (1920 pixels) as my 24" monitor, and slightly less height (1080 pixels instead of 1200).

At 40cm, the 46" looks just like the 24" monitor from about 15cm - you can see each pixel.

There are probably issues related to color profiles on an LCD panel sold as a TV that would make it unsuitable for some tasks, but LCD TVs are far from "horrid" as monitors.

 

[AppliedVisual]

FWIW, Toshiba and Canon demo'ed SED prototypes at CES last January that were doing 32" 720p and predicted 55" 1080p by this year.

...Yes, I was aware of that. The SED panels failed to wow anyone though and even though SED makers are claiming BS numbers like 100,000:1 contrast, most people felt that the panels were no better than current LCD offerings. In it's own right, that is still impressive having a first-time prototype of a new product like this holding its own against top models of the incumbant, mature technology. Seriously, if they can pull off 55" 1080p with equal or better picture than the top Samsung and Sharp LCD TVs for the same or less money, they've got a winner. I doubt it will hit the market this year...

I'm not trying to be an SED nay-sayer, but we have yet to see a tangible product we can actually buy. And most of the delays over the past few years in bringing SED to makret have been related to production costs and market conditions. In other words, as PDP and LCD makers continue to battle it out and slash prices, it's going to be very difficult for a new technology to jump into the market and offer equal or better display tech at equal or better price.

 

[AppliedVisual]

IIRC, Apple has been granted a patent for a means of providing resolution-independent scaling of graphics. In fact, is that not supposed to be a feature of OS X 10.5?

They have only applied for the patent, nothing is granted... And that patent is fairly likely to not be granted -- just like many others that Apple (or anyone) applies for. But who can blame them for trying, eh? Just like when Pizza Hut tried to patent their stuffed-crust pizza even though countless mom and pop pizzarias and individuals around the world, including my grandmother, had been making stuffed-crust pizza since before Pizza Hut even existed. ...The patent was obviously denied, but hey, they tried and just think of the implications if it were granted... No one else within that patent jurisdiction (pretty much all of north america) could commercially offer a stuffed-crust pizza until someone took Pizza Hut to court and overturned that patent ruling.

 

[AppliedVisual]

The stock 7300gt in the current Mac Pro is already seems to be fully HDCP compliant (I have tested it and found it works in WinXP with PowerDVD and an HD-DVD via DVI)

It is HDCP compliant. And so is the ATI X1900XT video card they offer. Now I don't know if Apple has enabled HDCP on either of these two cards within their drivers/software inside OSX... Probably not since their displays don't support it (yet). It's coming... I know I've bitched about Apple's displays recently, but we're just seeing typical Apple product cycles. They will update when they feel it's time and the new displays will be the coolest ones out there (hopefully). I just hope they don't wait for the UDI interface to finally update their displays... That could push new Apple displays as far back as late '07, even into '08. Although, I do expect to see some of the new 4K and 8K LCD panels demoed at NAB this year using UDI... Can't wait until I can buy one!

 

[fblack]

8 cores now? no way...

I can see new screens introduced alongside iTV, makes sense. You want to watch movies on a big tv dont you?

The iPhone they have to get out its too big of a potential market to cede to the telcos.

But 8 cores in january, a new video ipod and Leopard also? Too many products at once and you cant hype them individually effectively. Apple sometimes staggers their product releases, so I could see them waiting an extra month or so to release an 8 core, purely from a marketing perspective.

If they can release all of these products in the 1st quarter of the year plus Leopard then-wow it will be an exciting year for apple and mac-users. I cant wait.

 

[Liquidog]

Raise your hand if you can't afford a $4k Mac.

Almost everybody here. If you can't afford one, you don't belong here until you can figure out how.I'm willing to pay whatever they ask for them. I'm sure others here feel the same. Of course demand will exceed supply to begin with. It's a revolutionary product. So what if they are expensive? It's only money and you can't take it with you when you die. I think anything less than $4k will be a bargain. And I'll bet the base 2.66GHz model will be less than that.

So what if they need more cooling? Of course they're going to need more cooling.

"If you can't afford one, you don't belong here until you can figure out how."

My two cents (and I'm sorry if someone covered this already):
I've lurked on this forum for years. I don't talk much, but I just have to say, that comment is one of the most incredibly rude things I've ever read here at MR. Not only is it genuinely offensive, but it reinforces the classic negative stereotype of Mac users as snobby, rich, losers.

Multimedia, a lot of what people have been talking about on this thread has been related to smaller displays, lower priced desktops, and so on. Stuff that more people can afford. Of course someone is going to make the point that the new desktop we're discussing might be prohibitively expensive. Lots of MR members are interested in Apple design and capability at less than stratospheric prices. Many of us can't afford a four thousand dollar mac with 8 cores, but you know what? We still belong here.

 

[digitalbiker]

"If you can't afford one, you don't belong here until you can figure out how."

My two cents (and I'm sorry if someone covered this already):
I've lurked on this forum for years. I don't talk much, but I just have to say, that comment is one of the most incredibly rude things I've ever read here at MR. Not only is it genuinely offensive, but it reinforces the classic negative stereotype of Mac users as snobby, rich, losers.

I can understand how you might take MultiMedia's comment as rude but I think you are reading a little too much into this comment.

I for one have benefited greatly from discussions with MM. He stays current on tech and he always has good general advice as well as video tech expertise.

I only read MM's comment as meaning this thread is primarily discussing a high-end technology on a professional machine. Therefore anyone who is seriously considering purchasing an 8 core Mac Pro isn't as concerned with low-end pricing as they are with real world performance.

While price is always a consideration on any purchase, most professionals who use computers to make a living realize that hardware costs are very easy to justify when real world performance ie (increased productivity) is increased.

In fact, $4K price for an 8 core highend workstation is down right cheap. I had to pay close to $75K for my first high-end Sun Sparcstation with dual 20" monitors and 20 GB of total disc space back in 1991.

 

[Xyl]

I can understand how you might take MultiMedia's comment as rude but I think you are reading a little too much into this comment.

I for one have benefited greatly from discussions with MM. He stays current on tech and he always has good general advice as well as video tech expertise.

I've been lurking here for a while, and MM usually makes knowledgeable posts and does seem to give good advice. However, that particular comment of his about "If you can't afford one, you don't belong here until you can figure out how" was downright rude. If we all only attempted to gain knowledge on the things we own or planned to own, we'd be all pretty stupid.

 

[VanMac]

Almost everybody here. If you can't afford one, you don't belong here until you can figure out how.

I've been on this board for while now. Probably the most noob post I've read. Very sad.

 

[Liquidog]

Digitalbiker, I definitely take your point about this thread being geared towards high end machines, and I understand that relatively speaking, 4k is nothing for that kind of power. I also respect MM's technical knowledge; I just wanted to have my say as far as elitist comments go.

It's weird how this duality with Apple products works: anybody can use them, because the machines are so easy to use; yet not many can afford them, since they're more expensive. That's changing but it's still pretty much true. I think when we embrace the fact that Macs are expensive - and are willing to pay any price for the hardware - then it does a disservice to the real core value of the company and its products, which is ease of use, coupled with incredible capability. Obviously, we have to tolerate the expense to some extent, because you get what you pay for. But that's no reason that we can't hope for lower prices on outdated Mac Pros if new ones come out at MWSF

Anyways I'm off topic now. Back to the new gear. Who else thinks they should make the bezels on the ACDs much more narrow?

 

[leekohler]

Almost everybody here. If you can't afford one, you don't belong here until you can figure out how.

That was extremely rude. I need pro-level towers as well but you know what? I'm hobbling along just fine with my $1999 Dual-core G5 doing design and video. Get over yourself- everyone belongs here and is entitled to ask questions.

 

[Multimedia]

$4k Is Not Stratospheric At All

"If you can't afford one, you don't belong here until you can figure out how."

My two cents (and I'm sorry if someone covered this already):
I've lurked on this forum for years. I don't talk much, but I just have to say, that comment is one of the most incredibly rude things I've ever read here at MR. Not only is it genuinely offensive, but it reinforces the classic negative stereotype of Mac users as snobby, rich, losers.

Multimedia, a lot of what people have been talking about on this thread has been related to smaller displays, lower priced desktops, and so on. Stuff that more people can afford. Of course someone is going to make the point that the new desktop we're discussing might be prohibitively expensive. Lots of MR members are interested in Apple design and capability at less than stratospheric prices. Many of us can't afford a four thousand dollar mac with 8 cores, but you know what? We still belong here.

OK. I apologize. Glad I was able to inspire you to make a rare post. It wasn't meant to offend. It was meant to get your priorities straight. I completely agree that it was plain stupid to say no one belongs here. That was one of the dumbest things I've ever written and I sincerely apologize to all for having done so. Of course you all belong here. Duh. I must have been in some kind of super stupid zone when I wrote that. Very harsh. Please forgive me.

Here's my rewrite:

Very many and most everybody here. It doesn't take a large majority of computer users to make a high priced super powerful Mac a hit - just a small minority that must have them like all the Fortune 1000 companies plus all the media creator companies plus all the media creator freelancers. That will more than make the 8 core Mac a huge hit.

A 1993 Mac IIfx sold for almost $10k which in today's money was probably more like $15k today. There is nothing stratospheric about $4k for a radically more powerful Mac than that one was and if you think so then we completely disagree on what is expensive and what is not.

I get the impression that guys like you want more power for almost free. I don't think that's realistic. And I don't like the idea that you think $4k is a lot of money for a very powerful computer. Sorry. I don't. And I don't think I'm alone in that thinking here.

I've been on this board for while now. Probably the most noob post I've read. Very sad.

Thank you for the constructive criticism. I don't know what the word "noob" means but it's probably derogatory. I have a special talent for pissing people off. It's unintentional but nevertheless something I do every once in a while when I read something like $4k is too much money for a really powerful Mac. Dell is asking more than $5k. The Mac will be a bargain at $4k.

 

[Digital Skunk]

This is the case with most forums

Internet politness is gone these days. This is just like a post I read in the page 2 comment about iSights in ACD. You say one thing that isn't what someone agrees with and they flame you curse like nobody's business, even if you weren't directing the post at them.

I can't afford an 8 core Mac but I will still post comments and learn everything I can about it and what market it is meant for.

And just because somebody knows a lot doesn't mean they aren't being a jerk.

p.s. this is not pointed at MM so don't quote me and start calling me names please.

 

[leekohler]

OK. I apologize. Glad I was able to inspire you to make a rare post. It wasn't meant to offend. It was meant to get your priorities straight. A 1993 Mac IIfx sold for almost $10k which in today's money was probably more like $15k today. There is nothing stratospheric about $4k for a radically more powerful Mac than that one was and if you think so then we completely disagree on what is expensive and what is not.

I get the impression that guys like you want more power for almost free. I don't think that's realistic. And I don't like the idea that you think $4k is a lot of money for a very powerful computer. Sorry. I don't. And I don't think I'm alone in that thinking here.Thank you for the constructive criticism. I don't know what the word "noob" means but it's probably derogatory. I have a special talent for pissing people off. It's unintentional but nevertheless something I do every once in a while when I read something like $4k is too much money for a really powerful Mac. Dell is asking more than $5k. The Mac will be a bargain at $4k.

You aren't alone in that thinking. So next time say what you just said, rather than what you said previously.

 

[Digital Skunk]

Wow look at the HP

I finally got a really good LOOK at the HP monitor and it is hedious . I don't care about the "specs" on that brick, that thing is ugly. There needs to be some sort of asthetics when it comes to building things.

Apple, Dell, and NEC have some good looking monitors. Even HP's older monitors were okay at best. This thing is just ugly.

 

[geerlingguy]

I finally got a really good LOOK at the HP monitor and it is hedious . I don't care about the "specs" on that brick, that thing is ugly. There needs to be some sort of asthetics when it comes to building things... This thing is just ugly.

Agreed. HP needs to hire a new industrial design team.

 

[AppliedVisual]

I finally got a really good LOOK at the HP monitor and it is hedious . I don't care about the "specs" on that brick, that thing is ugly. There needs to be some sort of asthetics when it comes to building things.

Yeah, true that... HP's grey color alone is enough to make many people gag.

 

[Multimedia]

HP May Be Butt Ugly But It's Got 3 Dual Link DVI Inputs For $1620

I finally got a really good LOOK at the HP monitor and it is hedious . I don't care about the "specs" on that brick, that thing is ugly. There needs to be some sort of asthetics when it comes to building things.

Apple, Dell, and NEC have some good looking monitors. Even HP's older monitors were okay at best. This thing is just ugly.

I agree. But I work in the dark so I can't see what's outside the screen itself most of the time. Dual Link DVI Switches cost almost $1k. With 3 DL DVI Inputs on the HP - even includes two DL cables - it's got to be considered if you ever plan on driving it from more than one computer. If so, it's like getting the monitor for $620.

 

[TMay]

OK. I apologize. Glad I was able to inspire you to make a rare post. It wasn't meant to offend. It was meant to get your priorities straight. I completely agree that it was plain stupid to say no one belongs here. That was one of the dumbest things I've ever written and I sincerely apologize to all for having done so. Of course you all belong here. Duh. I must have been in some kind of super stupid zone when I wrote that. Very harsh. Please forgive me.

Here's my rewrite:

Very many and most everybody here. It doesn't take a large majority of computer users to make a high priced super powerful Mac a hit - just a small minority that must have them like all the Fortune 1000 companies plus all the media creator companies plus all the media creator freelancers. That will more than make the 8 core Mac a huge hit.

A 1993 Mac IIfx sold for almost $10k which in today's money was probably more like $15k today. There is nothing stratospheric about $4k for a radically more powerful Mac than that one was and if you think so then we completely disagree on what is expensive and what is not.

I get the impression that guys like you want more power for almost free. I don't think that's realistic. And I don't like the idea that you think $4k is a lot of money for a very powerful computer. Sorry. I don't. And I don't think I'm alone in that thinking here.Thank you for the constructive criticism. I don't know what the word "noob" means but it's probably derogatory. I have a special talent for pissing people off. It's unintentional but nevertheless something I do every once in a while when I read something like $4k is too much money for a really powerful Mac. Dell is asking more than $5k. The Mac will be a bargain at $4k.

It's all about context.

I have a 6 year old dual g4, gigabit, upgraded to a dual 1.8, and otherwise upgraded in most every aspect, and it has been fine for most of my needs, except that I have maxed out the power supply. I am unable to install much more than a 19 inch display, as the processor and Radeon 9800 will otherwise draw too much power. I have looked at the various models subsequent to the MacPro Core2 duo's, and have not been all that excited. Not enough to make purchase a priority.

On the other hand, I have a couple of PC's (Pentiums) that I run MCAD software (Pro/Engineer/GibbsCAM) on, and my priority has been to get back on a maintenance schedule, add a couple of modules, upgrade to 24 inch screens, and even add a seat of Solidworks. These things cost me about $30 a day in maintenance, seven days a week, but I generate income from them.

Today, or at least soon, I will be able to move the apps on my g4 and pc's to a single machine, some variant of the MacPro, with the benefit of running even more Apple pro apps ( I now have FC Studio via a Soundtrack Pro upgrade) plus at some point run CS3 in native mode.

Still, I'm not quite ready to buy (patience is a virtue I suppose) as I still await a Blu-Ray burner, Leopard and CS3, even perhaps HDMI connectors on new cinema displays, and graphics cards.

While I sympathize with those on tight budgets, I have to concur with MM that this discussion is regarding pro machines, running pro applications. The cost of entry is still relatively low, and most can swing some sort of financing if they need to.

Otherwise, I can't see any real issues with running even pro applications on a mac mini, barring special video/audio interfaces, albeit the performance will be quite different. Mac mini's really are quite affordable.

Here's some more context.

I drive a rebuilt 1986 Ford F-250. My wish list for this year includes a seat of CFDesign, Maya, a Nikon D200, and a Panasonic AG-HVX200P. I'll have to work a lot of hours in my machine shop business, which doesn't leave much time for watching television, shopping at the mall, weekends, or vacations.

So please stop with the elitist labels. I'm a working stiff, and I'll assume MM is as well, and all of us make decidely personal choices with our income and time.