Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

David Pogue: New iMacs and Mac Pros Coming 'Probably in 2013' [Update]

I'm annoyed as much as the next guy but i can see the logic here.

They dont' want to screw you over now. Because in Jan/feb they will announce a redesigned mac pro. Probably smaller form factor yet still allow PCI expansion. And they will announce updated thunderbolt retina cinema displays.

That is the only thing i can see as making this small update justifiable. With that said it still friggin sucks. If it doesn't pan out like this then everyone is right to be pissed at apple.
 
Woodcrest64 said:
You are exactly right. You can use Sandy Bridge on the Ivy Bridge Z77 platform but NOT the Sandy Bridge-E processors which is what the next generation of Xeon processors are built on. They for socket 2011 not 1155. Also the Z77 chipset does not support dual sockets. All I am saying is Intel didn't deliver to Apple so its not really their fault in my opinion. Don't get me wrong, it sucks for us but I don't think there was anything Apple could of done.
Click to expand...
What does LGA 1155 have to do with the Mac Pro? You are rather fixated on the minimal bonus that the Intel 7 Series offers USB 3.0 support onboard.

Woodcrest64 said:
Sandy Bridge boards do have USB 3.0 but its not native to the z68 chipset. The usb 3.0 controllers are from other companies like NEC. As far as I know Apple doesn't do this with their logic boards. Everything is Intel based in terms of the I/O.
Click to expand...
The Mac Pro has plenty of board space for additional controllers and an insane number of lanes to switch.

Intel has third party I/O controllers on their own brand boards. Apple already uses third party controllers on their logic boards.
 
duffman9000 said:
Every major OEM has a Sandy Bridge-E server, except Apple. Unless Intel has some super secret technology that it will only give to Apple, Intel is already ready.
Click to expand...

That super-secret technology is Thunderbolt. It's the only technical reason that the Mac Pros would need an upgrade.

Pro users don't upgrade machines based on a 15% speed improvement, that doesn't matter at all. You actually have to have a technical NEED for an upgrade, and right now, Intel isn't offering that.

----------
O and A said:
I'm annoyed as much as the next guy but i can see the logic here.

They dont' want to screw you over now. Because in Jan/feb they will announce a redesigned mac pro. Probably smaller form factor yet still allow PCI expansion. And they will announce updated thunderbolt retina cinema displays.

That is the only thing i can see as making this small update justifiable. With that said it still friggin sucks. If it doesn't pan out like this then everyone is right to be pissed at apple.
Click to expand...

It's not going to be Jan/Feb... it's going to be WWDC.
 
Eidorian said:
What does LGA 1155 have to do with the Mac Pro? You are rather fixated on the minimal bonus that the Intel 7 Series offers USB 3.0 support onboard.

The Mac Pro has plenty of board space for additional controllers and an insane number of lanes to switch.

Intel has third party I/O controllers on their own brand boards. Apple already uses third party controllers on their logic boards.
Click to expand...

Apple doesn't use third party controllers.
 
O and A said:
I'm annoyed as much as the next guy but i can see the logic here.

They dont' want to screw you over now. Because in Jan/feb they will announce a redesigned mac pro. Probably smaller form factor yet still allow PCI expansion. And they will announce updated thunderbolt retina cinema displays.

That is the only thing i can see as making this small update justifiable. With that said it still friggin sucks. If it doesn't pan out like this then everyone is right to be pissed at apple.
Click to expand...

There's nothing justifiable about it. Updating the Mac Pro with current-gen components would have taken practically no effort at all. They're just trying to eek out one more upgrade to let the Pros down softly.
 
Too Little Too Late!

Let me think you introduce a new OS that won't run on my current macpro, and then you don't give me a new one to replace it with. Instead you change the processor in a 2 year old machine and give us more ram.
I see a hackintosh under my desk!:confused:
 
Whaaaat?

soundguyami said:
I don't know if you guys are not refreshing your pages or what..but the current Xeon server class chips will blow the roof off of an iClass processor. Hense why you will not find an i7 in a server and also there is not an i based 6 core chip.
Click to expand...

I'm not exactly sure what you are talking about at all. If you could clarify that would be helpful.

If you look (I haven't checked since a little after my first post) at the comparison from the Mac Pro site to the iMac, it lists incorrect stats for the iMac.

I never said iMac chips are better than Server class chips? I'm not sure where you're getting this. I simply said they list the iMac 27" standard config as 6gb RAM and a 2.8 gHz processor where it's really 2.7 gHz I think and 4gb RAM.

Some other minor things were off on the page like the graphics card they list I think remembering it was a very old one similar to the Mac Pro's so I thought maybe they just messed something up on the page and it wasn't hinting at new specs of an iMac.
 
mozumder said:
That super-secret technology is Thunderbolt. It's the only technical reason that the Mac Pros would need an upgrade.

Pro users don't upgrade machines based on a 15% speed improvement, that doesn't matter at all. You actually have to have a technical NEED for an upgrade, and right now, Intel isn't offering that.

----------



It's not going to be Jan/Feb... it's going to be WWDC.
Click to expand...

Ivy Bridge isn't a great leap in computing power from Sandy Bridge. Disregard the updated integrated GPU, and lower power consumption, why would users want to upgrade from a 3 year old MPB? Oh boy, I can't believe I'm having this discussion.
 
mozumder said:
I think it's because Mac Pro buyers, who are pretty much video editors, have no real reason to upgrade their existing Mac Pro.

Apple doesn't cater to the server or scientific or financial markets, so that doesn't matter.

Video is still the same 1080P they've been using a decade ago. No one is recording with 4k yet. So, no real reason for Apple to upgrade their Mac Pros until people start recording 4k, or if they decide to serve up other markets.

Right now every other usage is covered by the MacBoo Pros.
Click to expand...

What freaking world are you living in?!?

As an example, http://timescapes.org/4k/about_the_movie.aspx is SHIPPING as a 4k to the consumer, shot on RED Epic at 5k. And this is an indie.

You also discredit the scientific uses of the Mac Pros, why do you think Apple went to the trouble to make OSX POSIX compliant?

If you have no idea what you are talking about, please don't say anything :rolleyes:
 
I haven't watched the Keynotes yet, but Tim would have been well advised to talk about a Mac Pro redesign that Apple is hard at work while also working with out parts suppliers to make it possible to have this upcoming Mac Pro a product even the most hardent Pro critic couldn't complain about.

Instead, they release a stop gap and then a blurb about ``hang in there, we're working on something much better for next year.''

You'd think they'd have learned from Steve's ability to future speak and keep the audience satisfied.

----------
relimw said:
What freaking world are you living in?!?

As an example, http://timescapes.org/4k/about_the_movie.aspx is SHIPPING as a 4k to the consumer, shot on RED Epic at 5k. And this is an indie.

You also discredit the scientific uses of the Mac Pros, why do you think Apple went to the trouble to make OSX POSIX compliant?

If you have no idea what you are talking about, please don't say anything :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Documentaries shot in 4K is one matter. Lord of the Rings shot in 4K being brought to the public is an entirely different matter.

I'm with you everywhere else.
 
I was fixated on the 1155 because you mentioned you can use Sandy Bridge on the Z77 platform and take advantage of the thunderbolt. You can do that just fine with that socket. But you can't put a Xeon processor from a Mac Pro in an iMac with thunderbolt. I think you know this judging by your knowledge. I think I was just misunderstanding your point in that Apple should just be able to have thunderbolt just fine on the Mac Pros.

The thunderbolt port requires an integrated graphics processor to have the display work over it which isn't available yet on Xeon processors as far I know. Intel is suppose to be releasing Xeons with integrated graphics to deal with this at year end. I can't see Apple releasing a thunderbolt port that doesn't offer the ability to have a display run off it.





Eidorian said:
What does LGA 1155 have to do with the Mac Pro? You are rather fixated on the minimal bonus that the Intel 7 Series offers USB 3.0 support onboard.

The Mac Pro has plenty of board space for additional controllers and an insane number of lanes to switch.

Intel has third party I/O controllers on their own brand boards. Apple already uses third party controllers on their logic boards.
Click to expand...
 
Apple is seriously mistaking that their professional mac customers would wait till next year for a serious mac pro update.

All this proves is that Apple, the company which is awash in massive profits, no other company literally makes as much profit as apple, won't update a simple circuit board to include

  • Thunderbolt
  • USB 3
  • Bluetooth 4.0
  • SATA

Of course add in the proper CPU, Fast Memory... ASUS could update a proper board faster than apple is. Its pathetic to hold off Professionals from having a quality system.

It will have effectively been almost 3 years since the real last Mac Pro update.

Apple needs to spend the money for an interm solution NOW!!! build a new motherboard, fast solution. use same body. get something better than this sham of an update.
 
Rocketman said:
As I have posted for a few years now I think the world is reverting to client server. Like the 70's. Thin client, thick cloud. It may very well be your next MacPro is a server farm in NC or OR with processes initiated on your iPad or MacBookAir.

A MacPro of any merit costs $5000. Do you have any idea how many minutes you can rent on a 30 CPU server for that?
Click to expand...
That makes sense for processing heavy, data light applications, but uploading a large video file to edit on an off-site server is not very practical. I doubt that is going to change in the near future.
 
Woodcrest64 said:
I was fixated on the 1155 because you mentioned you can use Sandy Bridge on the Z77 platform and take advantage of the thunderbolt. You can do that just fine with that socket. But you can't put a Xeon processor from a Mac Pro in an iMac with thunderbolt. I think you know this judging by your knowledge. I think I was just misunderstanding your point in that Apple should just be able to have thunderbolt just fine on the Mac Pros.

The thunderbolt port requires an integrated graphics processor to have the display work over it which isn't available yet on Xeon processors as far I know. Intel is suppose to be releasing Xeons with integrated graphics to deal with this at year end. I can't see Apple releasing a thunderbolt port that doesn't offer the ability to have a display run off it.
Click to expand...
Only the mainstream LGA 1155 based Xeons will have integrated graphics on select versions. It is disabled on the majority of them. Intel is not going to bring an IGP to the massive 6/8-core monsters they have for LGA 1356/2011.

On the Windows side LucidLogix Virtu is handling discrete GPU output from the motherboard's Mini-DisplayPort just fine without a nightmarish external Displayport passthrough. You just need the proper controllers, pathing, and configuration on the logic board.

Look ma', no hands!
 

Attachments

  • DSC_6445.jpg
    DSC_6445.jpg
    548.8 KB · Views: 89
Eidorian said:
Tell that to the Ethernet and FireWire controllers on my Macbook.
Click to expand...

Okay, I'm wrong. :) I am also wrong regarding the IGP being a requirement to have the display run over the thunderbolt. Apparently you can have a PCI-E graphics card interact with the thunderbolt controller to have the display run over it at least according to Wikipedia. Eidorian, thanks for a good debate!

So the question still remains.. why the lack luster Mac Pro update?
 
relimw said:
What freaking world are you living in?!?

As an example, http://timescapes.org/4k/about_the_movie.aspx is SHIPPING as a 4k to the consumer, shot on RED Epic at 5k. And this is an indie.

You also discredit the scientific uses of the Mac Pros, why do you think Apple went to the trouble to make OSX POSIX compliant?

If you have no idea what you are talking about, please don't say anything :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Like I said, NOBODY is using 4k and other markets don't matter either.

Are YOU shooting 4k?
 
Woodcrest64 said:
Okay, I'm wrong. :) I am also wrong regarding the IGP being a requirement to have the display run over the thunderbolt. Apparently you can have a PCI-E graphics card interact with the thunderbolt controller to have the display run over it at least according to Wikipedia. Eidorian, thanks for a good debate!

So the question still remains.. why the lack luster Mac Pro update?
Click to expand...
"Phase-out model" as mentioned earlier?
 
Woodcrest64 said:
The thunderbolt port requires an integrated graphics processor to have the display work over it which isn't available yet on Xeon processors as far I know. Intel is suppose to be releasing Xeons with integrated graphics to deal with this at year end.
Click to expand...

Is that factually correct? It would certainly be a more rational explanation than the "Apple hates us" whine fest.
 
useless

Rideherhard said:
New iMac is the new TV that Apple is working on, can also be controlled by iPad and file sharing between the 2.
Click to expand...

no need for that - you can do that already with your Apple TV and an iPad - I was holding my breath for a new iMac but now will stick to my old MBP and thinking about an investment into a refurbished iMac with some money left jingling in my pockets.

Apple should drop words like really great, exceptional, amazing and others when describing their products when it comes to the Mac Pro or the iMac - there really isn't anything outstanding right now apart from the, still impressive, retina screen on their mobile devices. I think that basically the mini and the Mac Pro are already "retina-ready". :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back