Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
If people consider the original Mac through the Mac 128K, the Mac Plus, the SE, the SE/30 -- then jump to the fruit-coloured iMacs and so forth it becomes apparent they've held this view for as long as SJ was in charge of the company and while his design legacy holds.

Indeed. The iMac was very much Apple going back to their design roots. I think many of us are still surprised Apple went all the way and even "appliance-ified" the Mac Pro. The Cube seems like SJ's pet project, and the new Pro is very much the successor to that, albeit better specified this time.
 
Wait til the pricing is announced...

So the chief comment here is related to upgradeability, product longevity.

remember that this is a PRO box - designed as a tool for those who make money when they sit at their computer... 10 years ago, in the 'glory days' of a pro, the industry was 1/10th the size, 20-50% worse pay, and the mac pro boxes cost up to twice as much - back in a world where every other part of living cost was 20-30% lower...

doing the maths, you NEEDED a 5-6 year life cycle to end up 'square' with how things sit today...

Personally, i enjoy pulling boxes down, i have my Mini running on dual drives (SSD and spin-up) with boosted ram and bluetooth shielding, and can understand that people want a 'one of a kind' DIY upgrade option, and am sad to see this go.

So if apple can price this new PRO correctly, the longevity of product cycle shouldnt be an issue... just give the 2 year old out of date on to the wife... a price drop would be nice.
 
The last post really made the point: this is not a machine designed to pass on to one's wife when boasting about your mini. The target audience is for folks who can afford this machine, or multiple copies, and regularly upgrade their hardware.
 
why the hole in the middle?
where is the CD/DVD slot for softwares ?
who would use it if any demand for it ?
can you upgrade it?

curious to see how it will sell...
 
why the hole in the middle?
where is the CD/DVD slot for softwares ?
who would use it if any demand for it ?
can you upgrade it?

curious to see how it will sell...

I am curious as well. I do know that Apple made the right move removing the ODD, but I was hoping they'd put something useful in its place (like more HDD space), not just make it smaller.
 
  • 12 core max - Apple
  • 24 core max - Dell, HP, Lenovo, SuperMicro, Asus, ...

But it has always been that way and will always be unless Apple sells fringe machines that they can't make money on. 24 isn't anywhere close to the limit, there are even higher end xeons with more cores that can do four and eight cpu configurations.

Apple needs to decide the sweet spot where they're going to target, and where to cut off at the high end. Sure there are users who may want a $10000 machine and be willing to pay for it, but they're going to sell a lot more of the 12 core machines, particularly if they can optimize them for what most users want and keep the price from getting too high.

Same thing happens with PCI slots, people kicked and screamed when the number of them came down from five or six, it was the death of a machine for pro users. And yet plenty of pros kept buying and using them, same will happen with this machine.

People always complain that the highest end macs aren't powerful enough (especially if there are PCs that spec out higher), but how many of those complaints are from users who would actually buy a $10000 mac if it was available, and how many just want bragging rights?
 
Apple should sell Hackintosh systems

But it has always been that way and will always be unless Apple sells fringe machines that they can't make money on. 24 isn't anywhere close to the limit, there are even higher end xeons with more cores that can do four and eight cpu configurations.

You mean like the 80 core ProLiants with 4096 GiB of RAM?

When the Xserve was killed, I said that Apple should partner or rebadge some x64 systems from one of the major vendors, or even license OSX for virtual machines, for a really low-cost way to cater to the high end users.

Now that Apple is killing the Mac Pro in favor of a souped-up MiniMac, I'll repeat that.

Rebadge or certify OSX on particular configurations of {oneof (HP,Dell,Lenovo)} workstations. Not a free-for-all of open licensing, but pick two or three dual-socket configurations and let Jony Ive put an Apple faceplate on them.

The new Mac Pro is a huge step up from a MiniMac, and I'm sure that the IOS developers will love them.
 
You mean like the 80 core ProLiants with 4096 GiB of RAM?

When the Xserve was killed, I said that Apple should partner or rebadge some x64 systems from one of the major vendors, or even license OSX for virtual machines, for a really low-cost way to cater to the high end users.

Now that Apple is killing the Mac Pro in favor of a souped-up MiniMac, I'll repeat that.

Rebadge or certify OSX on particular configurations of {oneof (HP,Dell,Lenovo)} workstations. Not a free-for-all of open licensing, but pick two or three dual-socket configurations and let Jony Ive put an Apple faceplate on them.

The new Mac Pro is a huge step up from a MiniMac, and I'm sure that the IOS developers will love them.

Really?
 
I said that awhile ago too.
We are building a Data Center at work and there is no way to run OSX as a Virtual Machine.
I see the Data center move in Colleges,Schools,business,Hospitals and if Apple doesn't get on the band wagon they are done in that market.
I had people say they don't use data centers in the film industry LOL. BS they use Data Centers all the time and linux too. If you are in your moms basement making YouTube videos then no you don't need a Data Center but you are not a PRO user either.
So by us building a Data Center we no longer have a use for Apple products unless they Virtualize.


You mean like the 80 core ProLiants with 4096 GiB of RAM?

When the Xserve was killed, I said that Apple should partner or rebadge some x64 systems from one of the major vendors, or even license OSX for virtual machines, for a really low-cost way to cater to the high end users.

Now that Apple is killing the Mac Pro in favor of a souped-up MiniMac, I'll repeat that.

Rebadge or certify OSX on particular configurations of {oneof (HP,Dell,Lenovo)} workstations. Not a free-for-all of open licensing, but pick two or three dual-socket configurations and let Jony Ive put an Apple faceplate on them.

The new Mac Pro is a huge step up from a MiniMac, and I'm sure that the IOS developers will love them.
 
I said that awhile ago too.
We are building a Data Center at work and there is no way to run OSX as a Virtual Machine.
I see the Data center move in Colleges,Schools,business,Hospitals and if Apple doesn't get on the band wagon they are done in that market.
I had people say they don't use data centers in the film industry LOL. BS they use Data Centers all the time and linux too. If you are in your moms basement making YouTube videos then no you don't need a Data Center but you are not a PRO user either.
So by us building a Data Center we no longer have a use for Apple products unless they Virtualize.


"there is no way to run OSX as a Virtual Machine"

What's this then?
 

Attachments

  • VMOSX.PNG
    VMOSX.PNG
    2.8 MB · Views: 135
This reminds me of why I miss the "down vote" button. You don't even defend your own posts.

Yes, I miss the down vote as well. Sometimes you don't need to defend your posts, case in point. There are too many mini users, wannabes, never going to purchase it, too poor, etc., posters now. Too many folks who are not really buyers but excellent whiners.

So yes, my one word answer is appropriate. And, I will be a buyer.

- David
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.