Wrong, you forgot the shuffle. There's still place in Apple's desktop line for a tiny machine that's headless but cannot be connected to a screen and runs the programs that it wants, when it wants. Because life is random(TM)
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.
Mac Pro (Early 2008) Notes and Options
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wrong, you forgot the shuffle. There's still place in Apple's desktop line for a tiny machine that's headless but cannot be connected to a screen and runs the programs that it wants, when it wants. Because life is random(TM)
Long post is long..
The only time Apple have done a mid-tower-alike they charged *more* for it than a comparable PowerMac. There's no way of telling how many people want this configuration - the size of the potential market doesn't in any way affect how valid their wants and needs are either way.
It could attract more upgrades from old Mac setups, and entice new users. Also, gamers are as important as anyone else. I indy develop and am doing degree games design - Almost everyone on my course would be interested in an affordable gaming-friendly work Mac - especially now they can run windows too (and thus 3DStudio Max etc), the *only* thing stopping them considering a switch is that the entry level for a desktop machine with significant power (enough for productivity and gaming) is through the roof.
I wasn't suggesting competing with the consoles. There *are* a lot of people who buy PCs for gaming, it's a substantial industry in its own right.. Alienware & Dell cater for this audience and they're doing ok. When people release a decent game for the Mac (WoW, COD etc) they sell.. They'd sell better if there was a "middle" option.
I can't "prove you wrong", but you seem to be going on the assumtion that Apple are reaching maximum sales rates, which I don't think they're even coming close to.. The fact that the Mac platform is selling amazingly in current configs doesn't mean it couldn't sell better if they had a more complete lineup.
Back to the gamers - none of them are likely settling for imacs, so they're not ever getting a chance to go "oh, this is okay after all!" - they look at the mobile components and buy or build a windows pc. (or if they're lucky, a MacPro and dual-boot)
Also, in film, CG, photography etc - the guys running Windows (still the majority) spending vast amounts on software, SLR lenses etc.. If Apple monitors are so much better I'm sure they'd upgrade to them across the board considering their livelyhoods depend on good colour reproduction etc. They don't, because other manufacturers make just as good displays. (even if they sometimes aren't as pretty and might not offer the same build quality) - That's beside the point though, ACDs are great but I shouldn't be expected to dispose of perfectly good widescreen monitors which got great reviews.
lol EPIC REPLY, sorry. I'd thoroughly expect these posts to be moved to some far-off mid-tower debate thread..
Personally I'm probably just going to get an Octo MP.. I love the casing, and the speed will be nice for rendering etc.
Who knows! Anecdotal evidence seems to support there are a lot of these people. Apple used to have cheaper tower prices. Apple never used to have the ability to run Windows. It's a whole new ball game now, and Apple should be supporting one of the biggest (in terms of revenue) creative industries in the world. If they don't get on the gaming and game development badwagon they're shooting themselves in the foot. The EA, id and Epic stuff all points to Apple trying to rectify this.
The only time Apple have done a mid-tower-alike they charged *more* for it than a comparable PowerMac. There's no way of telling how many people want this configuration - the size of the potential market doesn't in any way affect how valid their wants and needs are either way.
It could attract more upgrades from old Mac setups, and entice new users. Also, gamers are as important as anyone else. I indy develop and am doing degree games design - Almost everyone on my course would be interested in an affordable gaming-friendly work Mac - especially now they can run windows too (and thus 3DStudio Max etc), the *only* thing stopping them considering a switch is that the entry level for a desktop machine with significant power (enough for productivity and gaming) is through the roof.
People might want a smaller machine because it costs less and uses up less space, they don't just want a mid-tower for upgradeability reasons. I upgraded my PowerMac's HDs, Ram and video card, added a couple of USB cards - it only needs a similar level of upgradability - no replaceable motherboards, nothing particularly difficult for Apple to pull off considering they support a lot of the video cards on the market already. People have every right to want to keep their *good* (or potentially terrible, their call) monitors.
You're accusing me of smoking something then completely misrepresenting the market. Average gamers vs average mac user isn't the issue. Apple could gain a lot of users by appealing to gamers. Apple does really well in Japan. Better than it does in the US. It only takes looking at their media to know the Mac has huge penetration there (side-note, watch any anime and the chances of seeing incidental Macs over PCs is massive). Or adding up the number of Apple stores there, or looking at the sales of iPods etc. Hell Leopard even outsold windows throughout October..
I wasn't suggesting competing with the consoles. There *are* a lot of people who buy PCs for gaming, it's a substantial industry in its own right.. Alienware & Dell cater for this audience and they're doing ok. When people release a decent game for the Mac (WoW, COD etc) they sell.. They'd sell better if there was a "middle" option.
By past sales of similar machines I specifically meant the Cube - it's the only thing Apple have made that fits. The reasons it didn't sell are obvious and don't really apply in the current marketplace. I'm saying the iMac doesn't fill the niche for a lot of users. There is potentially enough room in the lineup for another machine. The iMac is a beautiful machine which does what it sets out to perfectly - I'd never argue against that. One of the things it's not setting out to do though is "mid desktop" or "normal gaming" - nor is the MacPro.. I'm saying the iMac isn't selling as well as a combination of an iMac+Mid tower would sell. Different strokes.
Apple can do more than one machine right at a time.
I can't "prove you wrong", but you seem to be going on the assumtion that Apple are reaching maximum sales rates, which I don't think they're even coming close to.. The fact that the Mac platform is selling amazingly in current configs doesn't mean it couldn't sell better if they had a more complete lineup.Back to the gamers - none of them are likely settling for imacs, so they're not ever getting a chance to go "oh, this is okay after all!" - they look at the mobile components and buy or build a windows pc. (or if they're lucky, a MacPro and dual-boot)
I never said anything negative about the ACDs. You're seeing everything in a much more black/white way than I'm actually writing. Lets repost what I said about the ACDs:
That is NOT wrong. I do have nice LG monitors. *I* wouldn't pay extra to replace MY LGs. There are a lot of people with good monitors out there. Apple use the same panels as other high end monitors. (Dell, Viewsonic, etc) Which frequently cost less. .. Personally if I *was* in the market for a new monitor I'd consider a ACD .. Once they support HDCP.
Other manufacturers displays frequently trump Apple displays in review round-ups. Being Apple-produced doesn't inherently make something worth everyone replacing their stuff if they already have equal or better at home. The HDCP issue will be a big one once BD takes off. A significant number of creative pros/illustrators need pivoting monitors also, Apple offers nothing for them. Are they wrong to want the option? So many users around here seem to have the attitude that if Apple don't accomodate you already you should just shut up or use Windows.
Also, in film, CG, photography etc - the guys running Windows (still the majority) spending vast amounts on software, SLR lenses etc.. If Apple monitors are so much better I'm sure they'd upgrade to them across the board considering their livelyhoods depend on good colour reproduction etc. They don't, because other manufacturers make just as good displays. (even if they sometimes aren't as pretty and might not offer the same build quality) - That's beside the point though, ACDs are great but I shouldn't be expected to dispose of perfectly good widescreen monitors which got great reviews.
The profit margin on the MacPro hardly looks likely to be massive considering the specialist parts. A Mid-tower would be made of some of the most commodity parts on the market.. The amount it could bring in new users may outweigh any lost imac profits. It would be a gateway mac like the Mini is, but for somewhat more-tech savvy/demanding users, and an amazing upgrade path for a lot of people who need more grunt but don't want or need a £2000+ machine.
They've introduced things that threatened to cannibalize other devices before. People said the same things before the Mac Mini was introduced. They said the same before the iPod touch was introduced. Nobody here can claim to know exactly what Apple is thinking, or even what's best for them. It's not totally unfeasable they'd try a middle option. People underestimate what they'd be able to do with it, I think. Just because other manufacturers' aren't compelling doesn't mean Apple couldn't do it well. (Same applies for tablet Macs)
That's probably true. But the vast majority of desktop sales still aren't all-in-ones, and the MacPro isolates a lot of people. Maybe it is a significant number. Maybe Apple have weighed up the pros and cons, and despite knowing it's a significant audience - aren't doing it anyway - That doesn't mean it wouldn't be good for the userbase (and environment) if they did.
lol EPIC REPLY, sorry. I'd thoroughly expect these posts to be moved to some far-off mid-tower debate thread..
Personally I'm probably just going to get an Octo MP.. I love the casing, and the speed will be nice for rendering etc.
I'm sorry Jimmdean but in my eyes you are a total loser. You play to be elitist and arrogant. I hate people like you. People who can only see black and white. Nothing else. What position are you in that you determine what Mac Pros are meant for or not? Who said games are for kiddies only? Have you watched the last Apple ads? I do animation, 3D rendering and some post production. When I have time I like to play a game and I'm very happy that the new Mac Pro has finally good BTO in terms of graphic cards. How dare you to think that games are only for little kids? Have you been sleeping last few months or have you not checked the Apple page in that time? Apple is aimed for everyone. They like to simplify things and they like to include more things in one. Mac Pro could be the case. It fits the professional need and it is also good for some casual gaming.
I'm sick of people who say that Mac Pro is not meant for games. Who are you to determine such conclusion????? I am a customer and I choose what I think is the best for my needs. People telling me that I chose the wrong product because I do gaming and Mac Pro is not meant for games are simply elitist .....(sorry but I would probably be very rude here so imagine what I meant instead of the dots
You might be confusing what I said with another user because we're basically on the same page here. I like all the new options too, but I'm not going to complain that there aren't even more options like that other guy. I like games as much as the next guy, but the 8 cores of fury should tell you that is not exactly the target demographic - you must have missed my sarcasm. Apple would prefer to sell you their Pro Apps with this particular machine, not World of Warcraft. And just a note - don't make such harsh assumptions about people based on what you read on message boards - it makes you look stupid. And I certainly don't hate you...
Forgive the bluntness, but the stock price determines whether or not things are going right at Apple, not the folks here at Macrumors.
Just look at the video game sector as an analogy - anyone want to compain that something is wrong at Nintendo?
Whoever said that the Mac Pro was NOT a good machine for Gaming is a Bleep Bleep.
Yes it does not Have Dual SLI but who gives.... I'm just looking to play Crysis at a decent speed and the 8800 combined with the Quad Core will rock. Plus they came out with A patch last night for Crysis that improves the graphics overall.
I'm not sure if anyone said that exactly - certainly wasn't me. Obviously, it can do the job - well for anything but Crysis that is. That game is so ahead of the technology it's silly. Even the multi-sli/crossfire setups aren't running it as well as intended (like it was meant to be played).
Personally I like to upgrade my gpu every new generation to stay ahead of the game, so obviously the Mac Pro is not for me...
Honestly, what is the advantage of a smaller and cheaper tower?
So "gamers" can spend the money saved on the video card, instead?
What's the point? Apple doesn't (seem to) update their video cards between complete model refreshes. And even when they refresh the video card, it may not work with the older machines - someone reported in another thread that the new 8800GT requires "EFI64" and the previous Mac Pro uses "EFI32" so they claim it will not work. And they also don't (seem to) allow non-Apple video cards to be used.
So "gamers" can spend the money saved on the video card, instead?
What's the point? Apple doesn't (seem to) update their video cards between complete model refreshes. And even when they refresh the video card, it may not work with the older machines - someone reported in another thread that the new 8800GT requires "EFI64" and the previous Mac Pro uses "EFI32" so they claim it will not work. And they also don't (seem to) allow non-Apple video cards to be used.
Mac Pro Update
Seems like Apple has thrown a curveball by updating the Mac Pro before MWSF, and while it is clearly an awesome machine, what I've heard merely makes it clear that it isn't directed at the user who really doesn't need the processing power that it offers. What the release does suggest to me, however, is that those who are seeking a mid-size tower, myself now included, may get what they want. I am hoping for the mid-size tower for the obvious reason that I don't need an eight core machine at $2800. What I do need is a desktop processor with some flexibility, meaning the ability to add a PCI-e card that every other Mac other than the Mac Pro lacks. I know all the arguments about why the iMac is so great, but I'm not new to Apple products and I don't need an all-in-one machine, I need the ability to access a significant external database (over a terabyte) and the ability to hook up to a large monitor/TV.
I've previously said that I anticipated that Apple would do a refresh on the AppleTV and MacMini, likely combining them, given the emphasis on delivery of movies through iTunes. Since that is a bring your own monitor solution, I'm hoping that Apple makes it a bit more robust in terms of flexibility and processor than it currently is for the simple reason that that makes the most sense for me.
I note that Windows is currently trying do something along those lines with Vista. I have alsways kept a parallel Wintel box and recently had to replace it, most reluctantly because the Apple solutions available to me weren't fiscally responsible. I've been through Vista and it is as clumsy as Windows has always been, so you can be sure that I'm hoping that Apple does something for MWSF for me. I hear all about convergence of computers and home entertainment, but at present, Apple's offering in that area is somewhat weak in terms of out-of-the-box usefulness. I'm hoping that MWSF offers the combination (a Clovertown processor in a MacMini with open PCI-e slots and an AppleTV interface, with HDMI or some more robust TV interface) that would jsutify my spending the money for an Apple product that I'm just itching to spend.
Am I wishing on a star?
Seems like Apple has thrown a curveball by updating the Mac Pro before MWSF, and while it is clearly an awesome machine, what I've heard merely makes it clear that it isn't directed at the user who really doesn't need the processing power that it offers. What the release does suggest to me, however, is that those who are seeking a mid-size tower, myself now included, may get what they want. I am hoping for the mid-size tower for the obvious reason that I don't need an eight core machine at $2800. What I do need is a desktop processor with some flexibility, meaning the ability to add a PCI-e card that every other Mac other than the Mac Pro lacks. I know all the arguments about why the iMac is so great, but I'm not new to Apple products and I don't need an all-in-one machine, I need the ability to access a significant external database (over a terabyte) and the ability to hook up to a large monitor/TV.
I've previously said that I anticipated that Apple would do a refresh on the AppleTV and MacMini, likely combining them, given the emphasis on delivery of movies through iTunes. Since that is a bring your own monitor solution, I'm hoping that Apple makes it a bit more robust in terms of flexibility and processor than it currently is for the simple reason that that makes the most sense for me.
I note that Windows is currently trying do something along those lines with Vista. I have alsways kept a parallel Wintel box and recently had to replace it, most reluctantly because the Apple solutions available to me weren't fiscally responsible. I've been through Vista and it is as clumsy as Windows has always been, so you can be sure that I'm hoping that Apple does something for MWSF for me. I hear all about convergence of computers and home entertainment, but at present, Apple's offering in that area is somewhat weak in terms of out-of-the-box usefulness. I'm hoping that MWSF offers the combination (a Clovertown processor in a MacMini with open PCI-e slots and an AppleTV interface, with HDMI or some more robust TV interface) that would jsutify my spending the money for an Apple product that I'm just itching to spend.
Am I wishing on a star?
Actually, if you'd ever look at the Games board on this forum, you'd see the Xbox 360 is quite popular among Mac users.
Am I wishing on a star?
Then downgrade the new mac pro for a single quad core - around $2200
my new Mac Pro, ships Feb 15th
dual 2.8, 2GB ram*, 500GB hd*, NVIDIA 8800, Extreme
* will be upgraded, added to later on
dual 2.8, 2GB ram*, 500GB hd*, NVIDIA 8800, Extreme
* will be upgraded, added to later on
It's not surprising Apple tries to distance itself from the gaming industry with so many strong opinions against people who play computer games! I guess they're scared of scenarios where the past where certain computers failed to be taken seriously because they were regarded as "gaming machines" - like the Commodore Amiga.
It makes me laugh when I see people talking about computer games being for kiddies. I bet most of the money that goes into football (soccer) is spent by adults - and that's just a kiddies game as far as I'm concerned, and one which people just watch, they don't even interact.
Do people have peculiar attitudes to their TV's? You may only watch the news, no comedy allowed? That would make it a kiddies TV.
It makes me laugh when I see people talking about computer games being for kiddies. I bet most of the money that goes into football (soccer) is spent by adults - and that's just a kiddies game as far as I'm concerned, and one which people just watch, they don't even interact.
Do people have peculiar attitudes to their TV's? You may only watch the news, no comedy allowed? That would make it a kiddies TV.
My message might have come across that way, but that doesn't change the facts. There simply is no large group of Apple consumers who want a mid-tower. You are just wrong about that. Sorry to be the one to tell you.
It's also untrue that many people *ever* upgrade their computer beyond a stick of memory and (maybe) a new video card. So my comment about what people "think" they want vs. what they actually want or need is pretty much right on the mark. This has been pointed out in the media many times over by people much more knowledgeable than me.
Well, here you are agreeing with me about "switchers" being the primary group interested in the mid-tower. Let me say you are absolutely right about me being right about that.
Here I think your smoking something pretty weird. If there ever was a demographic that is almost the complete opposite of the average Mac user it is the average "gamer." X-Box goons are noteworthy for their Apple bashing and their fierce unreasoning loyalty to Microsoft if nothing else, and the majority of PS3 users are Japanese. Japan is one of the only markets that Apple has difficulty in and has one of the highest Windows penetrations of any market AFAIK.
Okay now I am wishing I read this bit before I started replying.
One of the reasons a mid-tower is not a good idea is that the sales of the all-in-ones that fill this niche is through the roof. Making an argument that a product they are literally shoveling out the door should be replaced by a different one and claiming that the furious sales of ... well the machine that is selling, is irrelevant, is just nuts.
You are ignoring the obvious. Apple is already "doing it right" with the iMac and the sales prove it. A more important market segment to measure if you want to support your argument is those people who *did* want a mini-tower, that were then convinced to buy an iMac and were subsequently so disappointed that they *still* wish for a mini-tower and that they could take the iMac back. I would bet this is a very tiny group of people. Prove me wrong.
Wrong again methinks.
With few exceptions, Apple always has three product lines in each segment, a mini/nano, a mid-range, and a pro. iPod is the same as the desktops and portables in this regard, although I will agree with you that there has been a lot more variety in the iPod lines lately. Apple always strives for that three model segment though and one would expect that once the transition to flash is made they will return to that formula.
You are wrong about the ACD's also, they are almost the best monitors you can get, and for what you get they are good value. I have occasion to see dozens of different new (non-Apple) monitors a year and test them out and almost without exception they have lower resolution, poorer colour management and inferior construction. Even the good ones are generally much poorer than the equivalent Apple part, but the majority of users that would be happy with a mid-tower would also be happy with some Ben-Q POS monitor and not even see a difference. These consumers are not Apple's market.
Another really good sales-based reason for *not* doing a mid-tower is that it would take away from the sales of the existing segments.
If the iMac is selling like hot-cakes with a customer satisfaction rate that is through the roof (it is), and if the MacPro is doing similar gangbusters (it is), why would you introduce a new model that would eat into the sales of both? It adds to manufacturing costs, adds to support costs, and would have a similar margin to every other mid-tower out there (razor-thin). Apple would be destroying or throwing away at least *some* portion of those iMac and MacPro sales at a very *high* margin, and replacing it with sales of a low-margin product. There simply is no upside for Apple here.
Now since Apple is one of the few companies that thinks of the consumer first, they *might* want to do that just because "so many people want it" as you assert. But just as what I said when I started this post, I don't think you are right that this group really exists. If it does exist, I don't think it's large enough for Apple to throw away money on.
Games are a high majority of mac users only because they have money to afford games for consoles that range an arm n a leg as long as their mac as well
Because the Stevenote at MW/SF is also a forum for launching new products Apple wants the public spotlight shown on, I think the pre-MW/SF release of the new MacPro units is pure strategy, plain and simple.
It's not that Steve wouldn't want to talk about them, but my guess is that he's got other stuff that's either more important to him, or things he really wants to spend the time to "get the word out on" than the MacPro towers.
Also, I'd like to comment on the above comments regarding Mac towers vis a vis Mac all-in-ones...
I think the comment about people's perceptions of their wants/needs vs. their actual wants/needs is absolutely spot-on. In my rather lengthy experience in this industry, the only reason people have needed tower computers is that the base machine lacked sufficient resources to suit their needs, and that in the past there weren't external options available or otherwise not handicapped by the connection bus they might use to be desirable vis a vis having a ISA, EISA, NuBus, PCI, etc. internal connection.
So much of that landscape has changed, and now really if you stop and look at the situation, businesses with actual high-end professional needs excluded, really the only thing the "private individual" might really want to be able to change or upgrade (that cannot be done typically on all-in-one systems) is the video card, and even then the only group of users affected by this limitation are higher-end gamers. Truth be told, by the time the "typical average" person finds themselves inconvenienced by the limitations of their graphics card, they'll have already long since found themselves altogether more inconvenienced by the limitations of their entire computer, and will probably want to upgrade anyhow.
Let's stop to consider something, and I'll use myself as an example, because in many ways I am a representative of the average computer user in terms of needs.
The last PC I owned (I don't any more, but we'll pretend for the sake of argument that I still did) was a circa 2004ish Shuttle XPC that I'd built myself. It had two PCI slots and one AGP slot.
So, let's say I'm tooling along and one day I realize the 128MB Nvidia GForce2 card I had in the thing was outdated, and I want a modern video card to play some really demanding game. Well, guess what -- that would mean replacing the computer anyhow, since the kind of video card I'd actually need (realistically) would be a PCI-X -- and not an AGP -- card. So where would I be ahead by the technical fact that the machine had slots and was "upgradeable", given the reality that technology changes and modernizes so fast that I couldn't take advantage of the upgradability anyhow? Hmm?
So yeah, for the average person, upgradeability beyond a certain point ultimately becomes a love affair with pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking.
It's not that Steve wouldn't want to talk about them, but my guess is that he's got other stuff that's either more important to him, or things he really wants to spend the time to "get the word out on" than the MacPro towers.
Also, I'd like to comment on the above comments regarding Mac towers vis a vis Mac all-in-ones...
I think the comment about people's perceptions of their wants/needs vs. their actual wants/needs is absolutely spot-on. In my rather lengthy experience in this industry, the only reason people have needed tower computers is that the base machine lacked sufficient resources to suit their needs, and that in the past there weren't external options available or otherwise not handicapped by the connection bus they might use to be desirable vis a vis having a ISA, EISA, NuBus, PCI, etc. internal connection.
So much of that landscape has changed, and now really if you stop and look at the situation, businesses with actual high-end professional needs excluded, really the only thing the "private individual" might really want to be able to change or upgrade (that cannot be done typically on all-in-one systems) is the video card, and even then the only group of users affected by this limitation are higher-end gamers. Truth be told, by the time the "typical average" person finds themselves inconvenienced by the limitations of their graphics card, they'll have already long since found themselves altogether more inconvenienced by the limitations of their entire computer, and will probably want to upgrade anyhow.
Let's stop to consider something, and I'll use myself as an example, because in many ways I am a representative of the average computer user in terms of needs.
The last PC I owned (I don't any more, but we'll pretend for the sake of argument that I still did) was a circa 2004ish Shuttle XPC that I'd built myself. It had two PCI slots and one AGP slot.
So, let's say I'm tooling along and one day I realize the 128MB Nvidia GForce2 card I had in the thing was outdated, and I want a modern video card to play some really demanding game. Well, guess what -- that would mean replacing the computer anyhow, since the kind of video card I'd actually need (realistically) would be a PCI-X -- and not an AGP -- card. So where would I be ahead by the technical fact that the machine had slots and was "upgradeable", given the reality that technology changes and modernizes so fast that I couldn't take advantage of the upgradability anyhow? Hmm?
So yeah, for the average person, upgradeability beyond a certain point ultimately becomes a love affair with pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking.
Ok, do you think my CONFIGURE NOW Mac Pro I just ordered will do the job for me? I just need to type emails to my friend in Jacksonville and want to make sure I have enough power to do so...
Summary
Subtotal $23,197.00
Estimated Ship:
3-5 weeks
Free Shipping
Next business day delivery available
Specifications
Two 3.2GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon (8-core)
32GB (8 x 4GB)
300GB 15,000-rpm SAS
300GB 15,000-rpm SAS
300GB 15,000-rpm SAS
300GB 15,000-rpm SAS
NVIDIA Quadro FX 5600 1.5GB (Stereo 3D, two dual-link DVI)
Apple Cinema HD Display (30" flat panel)
Apple Cinema HD Display (30" flat panel)
Two 16x SuperDrives
AirPort Extreme card (Wi-Fi)
Apple wireless Mighty Mouse
Apple Wireless Keyboard (English) + Mac OS X
What, no hardware RAID?
Yes. I can't believe I just dropped $3500 for a PC knowing it will be obsolete in 6 months. Doesn't the Nehalem move the memory controller to the CPU like the AMD? That will bring a whole new motherboard design to the Mac Pro. Very cool.
Yes, that's correct. That's why I'm waiting for Nehalem to buy my next Mac.
I'm posting this here as it may be relevant. There's quite a few Mac Pro owners out there who've been told that 8800 GT video cards won't run on any older Mac Pros. Understandably they're irate, as can be seen from many of the comments in the link. If this is true, I'm assuming Apple will provide a Firmware update, but I can't confirm it. Let's hope so!
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/geforce8800/signatures-22.html.
Edit: Posted well before reading the "Upgrading old Mac Pro to 8800 GT graphics?" thread in the Mac Pro & Power Mac section, where this issue has already been discussed in depth. Overall, a most interesting read.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/geforce8800/signatures-22.html.
Edit: Posted well before reading the "Upgrading old Mac Pro to 8800 GT graphics?" thread in the Mac Pro & Power Mac section, where this issue has already been discussed in depth. Overall, a most interesting read.
It won't be 6 months, more likely much closer to 12 months (especially if Apple continues the trend of waiting until months after Intel starts shipping something to include it in an Apple).
And it won't be "obsolete" - it will just no longer be the fastest top of the line system. Nehalem will just be another speed bump in the 10-40% range, depending on the application. Your "old" Maxi-tower won't slow down, there will just be a new one that's usually a bit to quite a bit faster.
It will be similar to AMD, but better for dual socket systems. For quad socket systems, it will be much better than AMD due to fewer serial hops.
Check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_QuickPath_Interconnect for some discussion pointers.
AidenShaw,
Continuing on the thoughts in our previous messages: It's obvious in the photos of the new Mac Pro that the one memory board has been flipped. This must have necessitated a change in the motherboard. Do you know if this is a totally new board with different chipset?
Yes, it is. The old Mac Pro used Intel's 5000X chipset, which supports DDR2-667 RAM, a 1333 MHz front side bus, and PCI Express 1.0 slots configurable at up to 26 lanes, by default as 16/1/4/4. The new Mac Pro uses Intel's 5400 chipset, which supports DDR2/3-800 RAM, a 1600 MHz front side bus, and PCI Express 2.0 slots nonconfigurable as 16/16/4/4. (40 total lanes, only the two 16x slots are PCI Express 2.0 slots, the other two are still just PCI Express 1.0)
That's what I guessed was the case. Thanks for the details. So when the Nehalem processors arrive in a few months it's back to the drawing board, so to speak, with a new motherboard. Makes one wonder why Apple didn't just wait another few months. Lots of development cost for such a short lifespan and so few sales. I'm guessing the Mac Pro doesn't sale in very large numbers compared to Dell's desktops or even the iMac.
This is my first Mac Pro. I have a 24" iMac and a few PCs, one with a Dell 30" monitor (which will be moving to the Mac Pro). I have been doing a lot of reading the past few months in anticipation of this release and I must say I am very impressed with the design of the Mac Pro. When it arrives I will make the switch to Mac for all my daily work. It wont be so hard now that I have used the IMac for about a year. I have to keep a PC set up to dual boot XP and Vista because all my friends depend on me for help. Were all getting old, 66 for me, and I cannot remember all the screens so I have to have a boot my PC into whatever OS they need help with in order to assist them. Some of the ladies are pushing 70. Oh, my goodness, so am I.
You know, I remember all the early Apples. I could tell you some stories. It all started with a few hand calculators .
Sorry, reminiscing.
Same RAID 0 and 1 as before. I plan to use two 10,000 RPM Western Digital Raptor drives in RAID 0 for the OS. I already have the drives and though it would be fun. I'm swimming in bare drives, NAS's and external USB/FW drives around here.
Obviously this is not going to be a production machine just a toy.
Damn I love this stuff.