Could this be the new Mac Pro?

[Digital Skunk]

I'd much rather have a LONGER case than a taller one...

You insist on saying things that I agree with don't you Tallest?

Having a longer tower with at least 8 bays would make the Mac Pro even more expensive, but would put it in line with a lot of mini tower servers offered by Dell.

The only issue I see with it is that many users desks can barely handle the current Mac Pro, and you know that all the tech junkies will want to have the latest and greatest to use Firefox and look at Facebook on their 30" ACD that's on a desk far too small for their system.

Getting back on topic, I still don't don't think Apple will do anything major to the Mac Pro's innards. I know that we want them to, even with new chips that support it, but Apple is a big fan of f*&$#ing with us in terms of hardware.

 

[Tallest Skil]

You insist on saying things that I agree with don't you Tallest?

Mmm... I think it's more of a "We insist on simultaneously having the same better ideas than Apple does."

 

[tom.]

Getting back on topic, I still don't don't think Apple will do anything major to the Mac Pro's innards. I know that we want them to, even with new chips that support it, but Apple is a big fan of f*&$#ing with us in terms of hardware.

I am genuinely scared that they will do something horrific (IMO):
- Mini Display Port (As mentioned previously, I'm not buying those adapters)
- Put up the price or lower the current prices configuration
- 'Registered' only DIMMs - making RAM unaffordable

I can just feel it, something is going to piss me off.

 

[Tallest Skil]

I am genuinely scared that they will do something horrific (IMO):
- Mini Display Port (As mentioned previously, I'm not buying those adapters)
- Put up the price or lower the current prices configuration
- 'Registered' only DIMMs - making RAM unaffordable

I can just feel it, something is going to piss me off.

1. They will. Dual Mini DisplayPort out is the most likely turn of events.
2. They... will. Gainestown costs more than Harpertown.
3. What do you mean? It won't have DDR3 FB-DIMMs, but they'll still need to be ECC.

 

[Fomaphone]

1. They will. Dual Mini DisplayPort out is the most likely turn of events.
2. They... will. Gainestown costs more than Harpertown.
3. What do you mean? It won't have DDR3 FB-DIMMs, but they'll still need to be ECC.

aside from having to buy converter cables for existing dual-link DVI monitors, are there are any other disadvantages to display port? why mini display port and not the full size on the mac pro?

any chance these new ports will drop the need for firewire external video monitors in FCP? i've thought that it was pretty stupid for quite a while now that one can't use an open port on one of their video cards to run a preview monitor.

 

[Tallest Skil]

Mini DisplayPort is the exact same spec as regular DisplayPort... except Apple made it.

That's the difference, and that's why any DisplayPort on the Mac Pro will be Mini DisplayPort.

No idea about the FireWire thing, but with that technology being killed and all, I assume that Apple would have made provisions for it.

 

[Trip.Tucker]

Or ZFS, man would my life be easier with ZFS.

Setup two storage pools both 2TB in size. OS and data on one, backup to the other with Time Machine.

Or am I misunderstanding how ZFS works?

ZFS is already available, you should try it.

 

[Fomaphone]

can somebody tell me who the mod is for this part of the MR forums?

maybe this should be merged with the everything gainestown thread.

plus, trip,

ZFS Read-only Implementation

ZFS on OSX is implemented as a readonly filesystem by default. This means that only the ZFS subcommands that do non write operations are permitted. Permitted subcommands are list, get, mount, unmount, and send.

A full ZFS implementation that allows all subcommands and is read/write is available for download at http://developer.apple.com/.

Now don't all go downloading it and hose your drives

 

[Digital Skunk]

Mini DisplayPort is the exact same spec as regular DisplayPort... except Apple made it.

That's the difference, and that's why any DisplayPort on the Mac Pro will be Mini DisplayPort.

No idea about the FireWire thing, but with that technology being killed and all, I assume that Apple would have made provisions for it.

What I don't understand is how Apple is going to convince me to buy the new 24" LED when 1) it's marketed for Macbook users, and 2) it will have a useless Macbook power cable dangling out the side when used with my possible future Mac Pro. And I am a dual display kinda guy.

Basically, I don't know if Apple is going to go mini display port on the Mac Pro simply because Job's kool-aid idea of putting it on lappies so they can be smaller and lighter doesn't make too much sense on a 30 lbs tower.

I am all for full sized display port and new ACDs that aren't custom made for Macbooks and AREN'T GLOSSY, but there's no way in hell I can still have faith in Apple's pro market if they make a 20" and 30" LED with the same everything as the current 24".

 

[Tallest Skil]

What I don't understand is how Apple is going to convince me to buy the new 24" LED when 1) it's marketed for Macbook users, and 2) it will have a useless Macbook power cable dangling out the side when used with my possible future Mac Pro. And I am a dual display kinda guy.

So am I, but I will just quietly buy two Mini DisplayPort-DVI (single link) adapters (if Apple doesn't just include them, like I've postulated) to run my dual 24" displays...

smaller and lighter doesn't make too much sense on a 30 lbs tower.

The Mac Pro is 50lbs. Now does it make sense? I live on the third floor, man, I need all the micrograms off I can get!

I am all for full sized display port and new ACDs that aren't custom made for Macbooks and AREN'T GLOSSY, but there's no way in hell I can still have faith in Apple's pro market if they make a 20" and 30" LED with the same everything as the current 24".

I expect them to discontinue the 20" and update the 30" simultaneously with the Mac Pro. I'd even bet that it has a matte option (because it's for the "highest-end" customers).

 

[Digital Skunk]

.....

Good points all around, save for the lugging 50lbs up 3 stories thing.

I can only imagine Apple taking their time releasing GFX options for the Mac Pro because they have to work mini display port in the design. I wouldn't be too upset getting two adaptors, but Apple could meet us halfway and put full sized display port on their cards.

 

[tom.]

The Mac Pro is 50lbs. Now does it make sense? I live on the third floor, man, I need all the micrograms off I can get!

- I don't think weight will be of any concern to them in a desktop.

Also - everything costs more on first release, always. So far they have always absorbed the cost, what makes you think this time is any different?

And if you still think it will go up, by how much?

- In terms of RAM, they might not be FBDIMM's, but they have to be either registered or not - this is discussed in your thread, should probably leave the discussion there (sorry)

EDIT: You have prompted me to realise adapters were supplied with the current Mac Pro, it wouldn't be unreasonable to think that will happen for Mini/Display Port (as you said)

 

[Tallest Skil]

- I don't think weight will be of any concern to them in a desktop.

Also - everything costs more on first release, always. So far they have always absorbed the cost, what makes you think this time is any different?

And if you still think it will go up, by how much?

Two hundred dollars, taking the standard model to $2,999.

Always absorbed the cost? They upped the base model by THREE hundred dollars in the switch from Clovertown to Harpertown...

 

[Digital Skunk]

Two hundred dollars, taking the standard model to $2,999.

Always absorbed the cost? They upped the base model by THREE hundred dollars in the switch from Clovertown to Harpertown...

Upped the base model by almost $600 with the switch to Intel.

That was the death toll for the affordable Mac tower.

 

[tom.]

Two hundred dollars, taking the standard model to $2,999.

Always absorbed the cost? They upped the base model by THREE hundred dollars in the switch from Clovertown to Harpertown...

OK, so £150 from our current £1712, that is affordable (i fear it could be worse for the UK due to the weakness of the pound at the moment). I thought you might be suggesting more than 10% or so.

Back with the Hapertown update we were seeing $2 to £1 so it may not have mattered so much.

 

[dagomike]

I think sticking 8 drives in there is asking for trouble. I'd rather see Apple put on a couple eSATA ports.

 

[tom.]

I think sticking 8 drives in there is asking for trouble. I'd rather see Apple put on a couple eSATA ports.

Agreed.

Ideally I would like 5 Bays, 1 for OS disk, 4 for a decent size RAID 5 (software - I wish)

Never gonna happen.

 

[Digital Skunk]

I think sticking 8 drives in there is asking for trouble. I'd rather see Apple put on a couple eSATA ports.

Agreed.

Ideally I would like 5 Bays, 1 for OS disk, 4 for a decent size RAID 5 (software - I wish)

Never gonna happen.

NO, 8 like all the other server class machines. If Apple is going to put xeon chips in the Mac Pro for no reason then they might as well put 8 drive bays in there as well.

Throw in the eSATA ports as well and we will finally have a professional machine.

 

[Anonymous Freak]

NO, 8 like all the other server class machines. If Apple is going to put xeon chips in the Mac Pro for no reason then they might as well put 8 drive bays in there as well.

Throw in the eSATA ports as well and we will finally have a professional machine.

Funny, at my work, we have plenty of 'Workstation' machines with only 6 drive bays; some with only 4. (hard drives, mind you, not hard drive+optical)

And plenty of servers with less than 8 drives.

Yes, we do have systems with 8 or more drives; but those are not the common. Especially on low-end machines. (Yes, the Mac Pro would be a low-end server.)