This thread is ridiculous. There are pro industries where multiple high end computers and networking are standard for getting done what needs to get done, and you are making some sort of point by stating that your 2006 serves your individual needs? Are you lonely? Do you want attention?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I have a 2006 1,1 Mac Pro - And Guess what?!?!
- Thread starter Sean Dempsey
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree
The fact illustrated by this thread is that the OP doesn't need a faster machine for the work he does. Good for him.
However, his assertion that since he does not need a faster machine, then no one does is beyond ridiculous imo
Well, if you have to work that computer 7 days a week at full-tilt just to make a living, I think you need a faster computer.
+1
And you would buy today a 4 year old machine for the price of the latest hardware out there? $2500+ for a machine with 2x2.66GHz dual cores? An iMac for $2000 outperforms that one and it comes with a great 27" screen.
You have to think what you would get when you buy a new Mac for your money, rather then upgrading your machine at every 166MHz processor speed bump. Apple however is not really good at providing the latest technology to it's customers. Putting in sockets for CPUs is a good idea if they can't keep up updating there machines with every 166MHz bump in CPU speed. If they'd love there customers that much, they'd do. But as these things are rock solid and are outdated long before they stop working, you'd not make enough money of it. Intel changes it's socket every 12-24 month anyways, so it doesn't make sense. Like the first Minis, you can't put newer Core 2 or i-Series CPUs in, even if they have sockets, so you're forced to buy a new one if you want a faster processor. Apple might not have got that memo.
I bought my first Mini, even if I would have expected at least a i5 machine, not because of the price, but because they state to build the best computers in the world. Apples hardware is outdated on release date, and nearly always is, but the build quality and the software legitimate the price. The extra you pay for the
should include the engineering effort to put a i5 in there, that's what an engineering driven company does, that's what we pay them for. There are 2.5" 750GB drives floating arount for a couple of month which fit the Mini, MB and MBP, Apple doesn't seem to be able to offer them. For the price they charge you for a BTO hard drive upgrade, they could order them from NewEgg and still make profit with it. I predict the same for 3TB desktop drives in the iMacs and Mac Pros when they hit the streets later this year, technically they work without any modification to the software or production process of the Macs.That applies to the Mac Pro as well, but as this things are faster then recent consumer i7 machines anyways, no one cares that much. Six-core Xeons use the same Socket and fit in there plug and play, the demand would not be that huge so Apple would run into any kind of shortage on that chip, as these machines will be >$3000 anyways. These things are build on demand, it would be just getting the CPUs off another shelf then the quad-cores.
Doesn't make any sense at all, but sure, why not. iPhone 4 and iPad are money making machines, who needs Macs? If the 2011 line up is the same as this years with some minor MHz bump, it may be that there will come some Über-Microsoft company and take over the PC sector. That may be even the GNU/Linux community, if they radically improve their UI and usability. Technically, they're ready to go since a long time. The system itself is always the first to support new core technologies. They adapt to everything, if you hook a display up your toaster or coffee maker, it runs Ubuntu. Even the iPhone 3G runs Android. If you take away the OS, only thing remains is an unibody aluminum enclosure. ASUS and Dell might be able to build similar things as well, so do LianLi and Chieftech for desktop cases.
If you still use your 2006 Mac Pro that's fine, it's maybe as fast as a recent iMac or MBP (depends whether it's duo or quad), and that's the fastest Apple offers today in it's consumer line up. Newer Mac Pros blow it away, though.
not 10%....
It's not just 10% slower.
I have a 2006 MacPro 1,1. It has two 3GHz CPUs, 16GB of RAM, 2 Raptors 36GB in RAID0 as the system drive.
I also have a latest iMac, with 2.8GHz i7, 8GB of RAM, and a 2TB WD Caviar Green as system and data drive.
For a typical image processing session of mine (I am an astronomer), the iMac is roughly 2 times faster.
I still use the 2006 MacPro as my primary computer and I am by no means unhappy with it. However, I can imagine the 2x speed difference means a lot for people who are doing time demanding work.
It's not just 10% slower.
I have a 2006 MacPro 1,1. It has two 3GHz CPUs, 16GB of RAM, 2 Raptors 36GB in RAID0 as the system drive.
I also have a latest iMac, with 2.8GHz i7, 8GB of RAM, and a 2TB WD Caviar Green as system and data drive.
For a typical image processing session of mine (I am an astronomer), the iMac is roughly 2 times faster.
I still use the 2006 MacPro as my primary computer and I am by no means unhappy with it. However, I can imagine the 2x speed difference means a lot for people who are doing time demanding work.
THANK YOU for illustrating my point!
You say you'll pay "whatever premium there is" for the performance increase. So you should have no problem buying a 2009 Mac Pro instead of complaining about the lack of a 2010, since you'll pay "whatever premium there is."
That's the point I'm trying to make. There IS a faster Mac Pro available, right on the Apple Store! But people seem to be stuck on "But what I do needs something FASTER than what the 2009 Mac Pro can offer!"
And that's why.
If you already have a 2009 Mac Pro, there isn't. I guess dukebound85 meant that he will pay whatever the price is for the best performance. It doesn't mean that he is stupid and buys 1.5 years old machine when new and faster chips have been available for months. Mac Pro uses the fastest chips available, but not currently.
You fail to understand that some people need more speed than you do. Nobody likes buying outdated stuff, especially with horrible price tag, thus the rants about Mac Pro. The 2009 Mac Pro was fast before March 2010. Now it's outdated and its competitors offer much greater performance.
Would you still pay the same price for your Mac Pro as you did back in 2006?
There's nothing stopping anyone from buying a sweet Dell that outperforms the latest Mac Pro.
There is. Software.
It kinda makes me laugh that you are the OP of this thread and Mac Pro Update - July 20th thread
Case in point:
I'm a work/study student. Meaning I work limited hours at my University, while going to school. My job is a videographer. I had about 45 minutes of HD Footage. It took 2 hours to render it all. For 2 hours I spent my time on my laptop, browsing through the internet and checking out macrumors. It was hell for 2 hours. Start working with my footage after it's rendered, stretch my legs a bit...BOOM! The power goes out, turn back the mac pro on...and I gotta re-render everything. Another 2 hours of my life wasted. That is the same 2006 model that you're talking about. Had my work purchased a 2009 model, nicely spec'd it would of cut that time in half.
Accidents happen in your work area, and if you're working with heavy rendering...especially with a tight deadline...you're going to be pissing your pants.
As a graphic artist, what program do you work with? Because unless it is as equally as intensive as 3d rendering...then sure...you can use your mac pro for the next 5 - 6 years if you wanted to.
I'm a work/study student. Meaning I work limited hours at my University, while going to school. My job is a videographer. I had about 45 minutes of HD Footage. It took 2 hours to render it all. For 2 hours I spent my time on my laptop, browsing through the internet and checking out macrumors. It was hell for 2 hours. Start working with my footage after it's rendered, stretch my legs a bit...BOOM! The power goes out, turn back the mac pro on...and I gotta re-render everything. Another 2 hours of my life wasted.
That is the same 2006 model that you're talking about. Had my work purchased a 2009 model, nicely spec'd it would of cut that time in half.Accidents happen in your work area, and if you're working with heavy rendering...especially with a tight deadline...you're going to be pissing your pants.
As a graphic artist, what program do you work with? Because unless it is as equally as intensive as 3d rendering...then sure...you can use your mac pro for the next 5 - 6 years if you wanted to.
Yes there is. It is called the OS which leads many to a state of dependance where it is not economically viable in some cases to switch platforms
What? Now you are not making any sense
When you have thousands invested in software that runs on a particular OS, you can't just change hardware willy nilly
OP we get you are fine with your 06 macpro. Many others meanwhile would welcome increased performance so they can get even more work done in a more efficient manner
-I'm willing to spend x. I must buy now.
-But if you hold on a little while, your same x will buy more.
-No thanks, buy now!!
-But if you hold on a little while, your same x will buy more.
-No thanks, buy now!!
That's an infinite loop.
And I'd love a new 2010 Mac Pro, and may very well get one. But you guys make it sound like when you're doing "big rendering lol" that you need to update your computer with every iteration.
It is but you should never buy anything if you believe that. There will always be something faster and better.
The same thing happens with every Apple product when certain amount of time has passed. Most people won't see any difference between old and new but it's already the idea of something new and you never know what it will add. You don't buy new Mac Pro every year so you want it to last, thus get as fast as possible. I'm not on a market for Mac Pro but I do understand the frustration and I would be frustrated if I was on a market for Mac Pro.
This is still small compared to MBP speculation, there people won't even need the speed
It is but you should never buy anything if you believe that. There will always be something faster and better.
The same thing happens with every Apple product when certain amount of time has passed. Most people won't see any difference between old and new but it's already the idea of something new and you never know what it will add. You don't buy new Mac Pro every year so you want it to last, thus get as fast as possible. I'm not on a market for Mac Pro but I do understand the frustration and I would be frustrated if I was on a market for Mac Pro.
This is still small compared to MBP speculation, there people won't even need the speed
It's never that simple though. New revisions could mean new features (USB 3.0, faster firewire), huge graphics performance jumps, new design, new screen etc. It's not just a weighing game between something incrementally faster.
For example, the integrated battery life versus the old may be a deal-breaking feature for some.
Yeah I had a dual-processor Woodcrest model in 2006. Pretty damn fast computer, I had upgraded the RAM to 16GB and it handled everything very zippy and speedily and was a powerful workstation. I sold that machine to get a MacBook Pro in 2007 because I needed the portability. Been missing having a Mac Pro, so I finally purchased one today. Looking forward to having the beast back again!
I know, that's why I said "you never know what it will add", meaning new design, more ports, better battery etc