Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by macrumorsuser10, Jun 11, 2012.
Yeah, tons of sources saying that new desktops/Mac Pros are coming next year.
Just a shame that Apple is leaving us hanging in the meantime.
So Apple does not want to sell desktops for the rest of the year?
Apple is making a mistake in not updating the Mac Pro, iMac, and mini on a regular basis. It doesn't make sense that Apple is pissing off its user base in such a way and not being innovative with the computers. This doesn't make any business sense whatsoever.
The only thing I think sticks is that Intel is also being slow and both Apple, Intel, and the industry are not hot-to-trot on R&D and new products because of the general recession.
Honestly, if Apple updated the GPU as well, I don't think the reaction would have been as bad.
ATI and Nvidia are the ones who do new GPUs, and I've heard from one of those companies they have a new Mac GPU ready for Apple to ship. Sigh.
So the rumours begin already. These could be upto a year away.
Looking on the bright side, I predict the forums getting a tad smaller due to the massive amounts of jaded users. I guess that really isn't a bright side, is it? This really is a sad day.
says new desktops, not necessarily new Mac Pro's.
Apple is stupid on this issue
To go as long as they did without a major update to what was the flagship of the company, then release a dud of an update, but have rumors that a new desktop mac is coming in a year? If Apple does in fact have plans to continue the Mac Pro line, they should drop the secrecy that gains them a few marginal sales of current models and just say so. So what if it caniballizes a few sales of current models; the alternative is they lose the customer to Windows, possibly forever.
I'm still using a 2.66 dual Xeon, and I'm long overdue for an upgrade. I worry that my machine won't like Lion, so I'm still back at Snow Leopard. I am like many other people at a platform crossroads. I might be inclined to tough it out on my current machine if I knew there was in fact a true upgrade coming, but rolling out a lame update and then saying nothing else makes me think they're done with it and I'd be a fool to stick around waiting.
The mistake is treating it like a consumer entertainment device rather than the work tool that it is. People need to plan on technology in their business, and with Apple/mac/OS X, it's a lot more than just the hardware. Sure, I could build a Windows box, but I'd also have to replace $10k worth of OS X software. It's not like 1996 when the sum total of your peripherals and software was less than $2k.
Apple telling a bunch of journalists there will be a major update in a year is there war of dropping the secrecy. It's as close as it gets.
Cool. Maybe the 6750 will be a $300 option in the 2013 MP.
It is not the flagship Mac. Hasn't been for long time.
The "this is the future of the MacBook" tagline Steve Jobs put on the 'all flash based' MBA declared which vessel was flying the Admiral's flag.
The presentation today did nothing to change that. The product line that improved all around of the three was the MBA.
Then upgrade. The speed bumped Mac Pros still outclass tat 2.66 machine just incrementally more than the original 2010 updates did.
Besides Apples Vintage and Obsolete puts your 2006 Mac Pro ( if that's where the 2.66 is machine model MacPro1,1 ) into the Vintage/Obsolete status now. ( or will when they do the next list update).
From the prespective of "Is this much faster than what I have" the answer is yes. Next year there will be something faster. But in 2014-5 there will be something faster still. The question is really can you get more done with the new box than the current one.
Ivy Bridge Xeons aren't until 2H 2013. So, it could be more like 18 months away.... If this is real, Apple is going to lose a nice chunk of the desktop/workstation market. A year to a year and half is a long time for computers.
Especially when it will actually be closer to 3 1/2 years, considering this "update" is barely worthy of the term.
"An executive did assure me, however, that new models and new designs are under way, probably for release in 2013."
An Apple executive could say this about any Apple product line at any time. It is completely 100% meaningless. Take the iMac for a moment, now everyone is worrying no new iMacs until next year, when the chances are that they will update to Ivy Bridge next month and may (or may not!) update the design next year.
The fact that you can buy much more powerful workstations from Dell, HP and others and that Apple has dropped the ball tells you everything you need to know about the direction Apple is heading in.
Now it is just a case of working out how to make the best of the situation. Apple arguably produce the best laptops bar none. On the Workstation front Dell, HP... have much better products. If you can work on an MBP or iMac with TB to provide high speed storage then that will work great. If you need workstation type performance you should be looking at Dell, HP and other workstation vendors.
David Pogue needs to grow a sack and be just a LITTLE critical of apple. Come on! What just happened here was pathetic, and delaying a proper refresh to 2013 makes it worse.
And for all those ridiculous "apologists" out there, go ahead and explain why the video card options remain unchanged from 2010.
He doesn't say anything specifically about a Mac Pro refresh. Mac Pro is only mentioned at all in the context of none of the Apple desktops receiving an update at WWDC.
Everyone is reading far too much into this non statement!
The Mac Pro is fading away, like the iPod Classic. Time to accept and move on.
I am fairly sure that what is coming is a new redesigned iMac that will be quite different to what we've seen before.
I took notice of this as well.
We may find it's a newer form of the iMac they intend as a replacement for the MP.
6 core iMac that heats your house, fries eggs and makes toast? I've got my card all ready.
Don't forget to add cleaning floors, windows, bathrooms, dishes, laundry, and walk the dog.
I believe that Siri and the organiser app can do all that for me in iOS 6, unless I misunderstood the keynote yesterday.
a 6 core chip puts out as much heat when it is inside a Mac Pro as inside an modified iMac. How much heat is expelled into your house is the same.
The problem with a 6 core iMac is Apple's almost anorexic approach to design. Each generation has to be thinner. A 6 core iMac would likely be twice as thick as the current ones. It can be done ( the HP Z1's are twice as thick and don't look bloated. ), but it is highly doubtful Apple would do it. You'd also likely loose clock rate as the 130W 6 cores would be problematical if didn't also gut the GPU thermal budget.
If Apple uses a "iMac Pro" to replace the Mac Pro they are really only targeting the lower end of the single CPU package market ( sub $3000 Mac Pro range). They may go that route if the market drives them there. I don't think they really want to do that though. This "placeholder" Mac Pro revision seems targeted at the dual market also. If they want to hold onto that over the long term, then the iMac isn't really a solution.
The single CPU package might dissapear though. That "half" of the line up just went from 3 offerings to 2. It would be a huge leap to go from 2 to zero if Apple somehow expected to boost the dual offerings substantially in volume.
Given the increasing core counts per die and the performance possible from these chips, I really do see this as the direction the mainstream (lower-end) workstation segment is going.
Software's current lack of proliferation in terms of true n core multi-threaded suites/applications doesn't lend to DP systems leading the workstation market in sales either. The single processor systems, particularly Hex core or larger on a single die make a better cost/performance ratio without being significantly bottlenecked (if at all once other deficiencies are addressed, such as storage and networking throughputs in order to keep the processors humming along).
Well that is probably because they don't think any one would pay $700 to go from 3.33GHz to 3.46GHz or Intel aren't offering W3690s.