Apple Planning 'Something Really Different' for New Mac Pro

[Michael Scrip]

Apple better not waste space on an optical drive!

You can always add an external burner if you need one. (who should be using USB sticks at this point in all cases anyways..)

If you don't need one an optical drive, you CAN'T just make the device smaller by removing it.

It becomes wasted space!

I don't think people are using optical discs so much for data transfer. You're right... USB sticks are much more suitable for that.

They are more likely using optical discs for DVD production or audio CD burning.

But yeah... if the new Mac Pro doesn't come with an optical drive... you can always go external.

 

[Rizzm]

Apple should only include products that are actually used. You don't even use your optical drive 99% of the time. But your hard drive, cpu, power supply, memory, GPU - you use those 100% of the time.

Why should apple include a part in the box that is only used 1% of the time, when everything else is used 100% of the time?

Because it's not a mobile machine. It's not built to save space, it's built for the stationary desk user. This is so blatantly obvious.

If you care how much space your workstation PC takes up then you're just an idiot.

 

[JazzyGB1]

The Mac Pro isn't for anyone that decides to purchase it based on "ridiculousness."

You either need it or you don't.

Most pro users don't want to waste the extra space on their racks.

How much extra space is available in YOUR racks?




Yah, no one wants an internal optical drive anymore. It is largely useless. I'm sure you already know that. Apple is good at dropping support for these kinds of legacy products, with no market value.

You'll have to learn to use an external drive.

Apple should only include products that are actually used. You don't even use your optical drive 99% of the time. But your hard drive, cpu, power supply, memory, GPU - you use those 100% of the time.

Why should apple include a part in the box that is only used 1% of the time, when everything else is used 100% of the time?

It would be stupid for Apple to include that.

Not really,
At the end of the day an optical drive bay can be used as an extra HD slot for those who don't use it for an optical drive, so it's not really 'a waste of space' any more than an empty HD slot is.
What would be 'stupid' IMO is for Apple to not include an option for an optical drive when some of its users want it. Optical bays should at the very least be offered as a 'build to order' option on any new Mac Pro system IMO.

 

[charlituna]

Modular contradicts Apple's design philosophy; aint' happening.

perhaps this is the start of a new design philosophy. wouldn't be the first time that Apple broke with history cause they wanted to

----------

The Mac Pro needs to keep the same form it be useful for its intended market, JMHO.

Or it doesn't. Most of the market that uses a Mac Pro doesn't care about the form so much as the function.

 

[mozumder]

Not really,
At the end of the day an optical drive bay can be used as an extra HD slot for those who don't use it for an optical drive, so it's not really 'a waste of space' any more than an empty HD slot is.
What would be 'stupid' IMO is for Apple to not include an option for an optical drive when some of its users want it. Optical bays should at the very least be offered as a 'build to order' option on any new Mac Pro system IMO.

Yah that would be stupid to keep a dedicated 5.25" space for anything these days.

Do they even make 5.25" hard drives anymore?

Apple would be stupid to dedicate any 5.25" space for anything, since no one would just be wasted space.

Besides, anyone that needed an optical drive would connect an external drive.

It's not like Apple would lose any customers if they dropped optical drives.

 

[rimmeyb]

Sounds like it could rely on modular Thunderbolt chassis for multiple GPU, hard drives, etc.

would be neat, TB ports go Fiber in this model?

 

[mozumder]

Because it's not a mobile machine. It's not built to save space, it's built for the stationary desk user. This is so blatantly obvious.

If you care how much space your workstation PC takes up then you're just an idiot.

People that don't care how much space their workstation takes up in a rack are unprofessional idiots.

Apple should never listen to these idiots.

These idiots probably think power is only of concern for laptops.

It's a good thing these idiots are never taken seriously.

 

[Xiroteus]

The Mac Pro isn't for anyone that decides to purchase it based on "ridiculousness."

You either need it or you don't.

Most pro users don't want to waste the extra space on their racks.

How much extra space is available in YOUR racks?




Yah, no one wants an internal optical drive anymore. It is largely useless. I'm sure you already know that. Apple is good at dropping support for these kinds of legacy products, with no market value.

You'll have to learn to use an external drive.

Apple should only include products that are actually used. You don't even use your optical drive 99% of the time. But your hard drive, cpu, power supply, memory, GPU - you use those 100% of the time.

Why should apple include a part in the box that is only used 1% of the time, when everything else is used 100% of the time?

It would be stupid for Apple to include that.

My personal use it going down, and my statements are becoming less about my needs and more of a voice on how they are still useful. My stance on optical drives was strongly based on using whatever computer I have for everything, I don't have a television so my system needed to be a tv and a player for films both dvd and blu-ray, however that has changed little by little and aside from movies (renting, library etc..) the only time I require an optical drive these days is when a friend or family needed something on disc.

It is still not "stupid" to have an option for one, it is a desktop, people can stop obsessing over 1/100 of an inch on every machine.

At the same time I can see how it feels like a waste of space to those who do not use it, thus the reason for good options (externals do not count for the most part) Most people have a tv and player for their movies, all computer content is sent to flash drives, external hard drives etc.. that is how I do it and prefer it. Games are never on discs anymore, just download those when under ten dollars.

I'm moving away from any great need for the optical drive on at least a laptop, still on the fence regarding a desktop depending on if it is the only device I have for entertainment.

It's not like Apple would lose any customers if they dropped optical drives.

Yes they will, likely a VERY small number yet the do exist.

Are they likely to lose customers because there is an optical drive vs not buying because there is none?

These idiots probably think power is only of concern for laptops.

.

I have never heard anyone say that.

 

[alec6542]

I hope they don't leave out an optical drive or ethernet port. I don't really agree that these two technologies are dead yet. At work we are required to hook up our computers to the Internet via ethernet only.

 

[SR1234]

Thunderbolt Yipee

Wow that is something really different. I am so glad that I will be able to use all of my Thunderbolt devices that I currently use with my Macbook Pro. Oh wait, there's pretty much zero in the way of Thunderbolt devices out there and if I didn't want internal expansion I'd buy a new notebook or an iMac. Maybe it'll work great with Finalcut Pro X. Oh way that software still blows. I am still not feeling the love from Tim Cook as a pro user.

 

[iZac]

[dream]

an 8 inch square aluminium cube suspended on a 4 inch glass pedestal.

TB port connects to an expansion cube which contains it's own PCI slots, HD slots and optical drive bays. Said expansion device could also connect to other macs (laptops and otherwise) via thunderbolt 2 only.

Mac Pros can also be daisy chained (via TB2) to each other to create impromptu render farms that act as a single CPU.

[/dream]

 

[SR1234]

Actually I don't care

People that don't care how much space their workstation takes up in a rack are unprofessional idiots.

Apple should never listen to these idiots.

These idiots probably think power is only of concern for laptops.

It's a good thing these idiots are never taken seriously.

Actually I am a professional and don't care about how much space my desktop machine takes up. If I wanted a small machine I would buy a mini. Here's a thought: if you take all the room out of the box and you still need little things like drive space you just end up with another pile of gear. But then an idiot could figure that out.

 

[asiga]

Thanks a lot for this rumor!! I was really missing rumors about Macs. All I expect from a new Mac Pro is a powerful CPU, a powerful gfx card, SSD, ultrasilent, and not running at too hot temperatures. I wish they meet this requirements, and I wish they announce it soon!

 

[winterspan]

Going to show how under-studied I am on the topic of Thunderbolt, but is it able to support an externally housed GPU?

And that is the problem none of the non-techies on this site are considering. Thunderbolt is essentially a 4 lane PCIe 2.0 connection. High powered GPUs usually need a 16-lane PCIe 2.0 connection to the CPU (or 8-lane PCIe 3.0 as the newer standard is twice as fast per lane). Thunderbolt would be fast enough for a lower powered mid-tier GPU, but not for a progressional 3D card. This same problem has hindered all the external laptop GPU docks which run through the ExpressCard interface (granted, that was 1 lane PCIe so it was even worse)

 

[mozumder]

Actually I am a professional and don't care about how much space my desktop machine takes up. If I wanted a small machine I would buy a mini. Here's a thought: if you take all the room out of the box and you still need little things like drive space you just end up with another pile of gear. But then an idiot could figure that out.

Yah that doesn't happen. People still need to save space on racks, of which the Mac Pro and the Mac Mini are the only systems Apple has left that can work in racks.

You assume too much when you think the Mac Pro is a desktop.

How are YOU going to save space on a rack if it's wasted with junk like optical drives?

And BTW this would include use in portable racks.

 

[HurryKayne]

New Mac Pro is going to be a standalone thunderbolt device with integrated gpu's, memory etc, and is going to require another mac to function. You heard it here first guys

Mac Pro doesn't need Thunderbolt for Gpu...
it has Discrete Gpu..inside..
also
we already have that...a Mini Quad Core has already Integrated Gpu
and Thunderbolt...

LATER this year...this doesn't seem to mean WWDC but LATE NOVEMBER
THE END OF DECEMBER...maybe because Desktops are SANTA'S AFFAIRS?

 

[thejadedmonkey]

Yah that doesn't happen. People still need to save space on racks, of which the Mac Pro and the Mac Mini are the only systems Apple has left that can work in racks.

You assume too much when you think the Mac Pro is a desktop.

How are YOU going to save space on a rack if it's wasted with junk like optical drives?

And BTW this would include use in portable racks.

I think the issue is more that Apple stopped making a rack mounted machine, but some people just won't give it up and insist on show-horning desktop machines into a server rack.

 

[hleewell]

Damn the Cube, damn the modular dream, damn TB 2.0.
It is probably just a case re-design and make a lot of
folks happy ...again

 

[mdriftmeyer]

There's very little in way of a tower that will be "really" different. Seriously. Sounds like an overhype.

Not if they design a Modern NeXT Cube and completely redesigned the interior while expanding T-bolt 20Gbps with multiple outs and more, like redundant power supplies, Enterprise RAID on-board a daughter card, a daughter card that expands to either 128/256GB of ECC RAM/Non-ECC RAM, to built-in 512MB/1GB SSD with included 4TB redundant Disk Drives that can be extended with a new RAID Solution, not just 3rd party only.

Included Fiber Channel allowing easy extension with Blade Servers for Render Farms, etc., would be a hit.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

Mac Pro doesn't need Thunderbolt for Gpu...
it has Discrete Gpu..inside..
also
we already have that...a Mini Quad Core has already Integrated Gpu
and Thunderbolt...

LATER this year...this doesn't seem to mean WWDC but LATE NOVEMBER
THE END OF DECEMBER...maybe because Desktops are SANTA'S AFFAIRS?

Apple's 4th Quarter brings us to September 29, with Q4 results near the last week of October.

 

[Joe The Dragon]

Sounds like a small powerful machine with support for external GPUs and HDDs via Thunderbolt.

Thunderbolt does not have the bandwidth for that 1 GPU can max it out and under power the GPU by a lot.

 

[chrono1081]

All I want is updated OpenGL so that I can finally have Mari for Mac and can stop pestering poor Jack Greasley.

 

[Hunabku]

Maybe it'll work great with Finalcut Pro X. Oh way that software still blows. I am still not feeling the love from Tim Cook as a pro user.

Sorry for you that FCPX still blows. So you've used it lately and you're aware what others are saying now? Yes FCPX wasn't fully baked when it came out but its engine was far ahead of its time. Now its feature set is filled out and many of its rough edges are more polished. Apple lost many pros and rightfully so - but now they're positioned to kick ass, as i suspect that the modularity of the new mac pros will translate into significant speed gains and FCPX which will be the showcase software for their Mac Pro systems.

 

[Hunabku]

Yes, but the throughput is not close to that of a PCIe x16 slot.

That's true but i wonder if it matters that much. i think a lot of us here are getting flustered about the PCIe versus TB bandwidth comparison but we have no idea how apple might engineer the system, and who among us has a qualified hardware engineering background?

As far as the PCIe bandwidth issue - here is what a seemingly knowledgable user from neowin forum said:

What people need to realise is that there is not enough data going over the PCIe link to make a difference. The graphics cards want low latency to the CPU and system memory they don't need high bandwidth as all that graphics data is being stored on the GPU itself in its memory and processed by the on-card GPU. Very little PCIe activity. An x4 link still has 16Gb/ps (2GB/ps) of bandwidth. Do you seriously think the GPU is transferring 16Gb of data per second with the CPU and System Memory? - No.

I don't know where this misinformation started but it has been debunked over and over and over again.

What is the latency of TB 2?

 

[chedda]

Sounds perfect for my needs. I just want stacked CPUs as render nodes. I called the modular thing maybe a year ago here somewhere. Thunderbolt has always been a bit gimped that's why it'll be light peak this time. I wonder if the modules will show as one machine so licensing will be easier. I also hope the Xeon Phi is incorporated somewhere. If the new machine is so different it won't be a silent upgrade. It will be a special event showcased with some pro software (3ds max for osx).