A while back, somebody said the lead time was 4-6 weeks. Hard to tell what it actually is...
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 release speculation
- Thread starter strausd
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A while back, somebody said the lead time was 4-6 weeks. Hard to tell what it actually is...
13 weeks typically involves the actual manufacture, shipping, customs,... And in the real world, things do go wrong (ah... the crap I've been through over Antec transformers...
). Seriously, if the paperwork is borked, it could get caught in customs for a lengthy period of time. Then there's weather conditions (re-routing around storms), pirates, and even sinkings.In this case, Intel would have had parts ready to ship on the release date (ideally, packed in their shipping containers, and all the requisite documents in perfect order, and even loaded onto the ship).
The 4 - 6 weeks is more realistic in this case, as the parts were in fact already manufactured for their initial shipment (contracts typically contain penalties if they can't meet deadlines).
Once out of Customs, they have to be transported to the Assembly site, and stored. They do a test run (assy. line QC/validation), and then they can begin filling orders, packing, and finally shipping individual orders.
There is time involved before systems actually are shipped, even after the assy. location has parts (not much at this point though, unless there's a major problem).
IMO, the Mac Pro is OEL.
It's just not the profit vehicle it once was. The profit lies in the hands of consumer products today.
Why? 10 years ago, for professional work, you needed professional equipment, not consumer-level computing hardware. Today, the line is very blurred, there is practically no incentive to buy a Mac Pro, or any other workstation class computer as the consumer parts are neck and neck. .
Want a quad core, 2.8GHz CPU? Get an iMac. Want 16GB of ram? Get an iMac. Want 2TB of storage? Get an iMac. Want more storage? Get an external enclosure.
These types of relative options were simply not available 10 years ago. If you wanted lots of RAM, storage, and good CPUs, you could not go the consumer route. Now, workstations are directly competing with their consumer counterparts. This is the first time this has happened to the industry. What happens when you have to similar products? The consumers flock towards the cheaper, more value-added alternative.
Today's media creation professional can easily get away with using an iMac. Why would they pay almost twice to get a similar experience? Of course many still do, but the consumer side of the market is luring more and more people in every year.
It's just not the profit vehicle it once was. The profit lies in the hands of consumer products today.
Why? 10 years ago, for professional work, you needed professional equipment, not consumer-level computing hardware. Today, the line is very blurred, there is practically no incentive to buy a Mac Pro, or any other workstation class computer as the consumer parts are neck and neck. .
Want a quad core, 2.8GHz CPU? Get an iMac. Want 16GB of ram? Get an iMac. Want 2TB of storage? Get an iMac. Want more storage? Get an external enclosure.
These types of relative options were simply not available 10 years ago. If you wanted lots of RAM, storage, and good CPUs, you could not go the consumer route. Now, workstations are directly competing with their consumer counterparts. This is the first time this has happened to the industry. What happens when you have to similar products? The consumers flock towards the cheaper, more value-added alternative.
Today's media creation professional can easily get away with using an iMac. Why would they pay almost twice to get a similar experience? Of course many still do, but the consumer side of the market is luring more and more people in every year.
Only problem is..
Want a decent matte screen? Don't get an iMac
Want a uniform screen? Don't get an iMac
Want to be able to replace your hard drive eventually since they all have a 100% failure rate? Don't get an iMac
Want a decent GPU? Don't get an iMac
Want to be able to add storage that is NOT limited by a usb2 or firewire bus? Don't get an iMac.
The iMac's are certainly lacking in many areas that standard desktops cover with ease. Remember, the PC market is growing, Apple is only treating it like it's dying because it creates hype for their iGadgets.
With Macs, Yes.
But with previous Intel based systems, that's not been exactly true. The 486 for example, was also used in Worstation systems of the day.
It would depend on specific usage.
If they need RAID, the iMac isn't the best choice, and as mentioned, those that want/need different monitor solutions may have a different take as well.
Then there's GPU options, which are limited in the MP, but non-existant for the iMac.
13 weeks typically involves the actual manufacture, shipping, customs,... And in the real world, things do go wrong (ah... the crap I've been through over Antec transformers...
In this case, Intel would have had parts ready to ship on the release date (ideally, packed in their shipping containers, and all the requisite documents in perfect order, and even loaded onto the ship).
The 4 - 6 weeks is more realistic in this case, as the parts were in fact already manufactured for their initial shipment (contracts typically contain penalties if they can't meet deadlines).
Once out of Customs, they have to be transported to the Assembly site, and stored. They do a test run (assy. line QC/validation), and then they can begin filling orders, packing, and finally shipping individual orders.
There is time involved before systems actually are shipped, even after the assy. location has parts (not much at this point though, unless there's a major problem).
There are also other things we don't know that affect release time. Things like what parts Apple will use. What the frequency of parts produced by Intel is usually, or with these processors, or specifically with the ones Apple want to use. How it is worked out who gets what if supply is limited. How many processors Apple would need; because we don't know how many units they ship, or would want ready for launch. How much time it takes from Apple having access to having retail boxes travelling to stores.
I think we can guess that Apple would rather wait until they can sustain demand and sell older systems in the meantime rather than struggle to fulfil orders.
All we ever really had to go on was the time frame Apple launched within of previous Intel releases, but people tend to take Intel's definition of a release to be the same and as "it's down to vendors now".
Bingo! The iPad seems like such a step backwards for no logical reason - other than to sell something new and shiny.
Want a decent matte screen? Don't get an iMac
IMHO the iMac's display is the best out in the market today. Sure its a bit glossy but if you position the iMac in a room right it wont look glossy at all (same goes for the 24" LED Cinema display). It has a 27" H-IPS panel with LED Backlight technology (try finding another display with these specs and size for this price).
Want a uniform screen? Don't get an iMac
All screens have some form of uneven uniformity, just because a handful of people out of millions are complaining doesnt mean anything.
Want to be able to replace your hard drive eventually since they all have a 100% failure rate? Don't get an iMac
Although I havnt done the harddrive upgrade to an iMac 27" (as I dont own one), I've read the guides on how to do it and it doesnt seem that hard at all. Also, if you REALLY wanted to do this upgrade, you'll end up doing it.
Want a decent GPU? Don't get an iMac
There's nothing wrong with the ATI 4850. It seems to be powerful enough for most games (especially most mac users arnt hardcore gamers). But the 4850 is MORE THAN good enough to play any game.
Want to be able to add storage that is NOT limited by a usb2 or firewire bus? Don't get an iMac.
The Firewire 800 is the best option right now imho. You can add 2TB external HDD and daisy chain them via fw 800. If not you can always buy a drobo and just firewire 800 it to the iMac with 8TB. USB 3.0 imo is overrated. In real world usage its about the same speed as the age old firewire 800. I suppose light peak is what we really want but that'll be a while.
IMHO the iMac's display is the best out in the market today. Sure its a bit glossy but if you position the iMac in a room right it wont look glossy at all (same goes for the 24" LED Cinema display). It has a 27" H-IPS panel with LED Backlight technology (try finding another display with these specs and size for this price).
Want a uniform screen? Don't get an iMac
All screens have some form of uneven uniformity, just because a handful of people out of millions are complaining doesnt mean anything.
Want to be able to replace your hard drive eventually since they all have a 100% failure rate? Don't get an iMac
Although I havnt done the harddrive upgrade to an iMac 27" (as I dont own one), I've read the guides on how to do it and it doesnt seem that hard at all. Also, if you REALLY wanted to do this upgrade, you'll end up doing it.
Want a decent GPU? Don't get an iMac
There's nothing wrong with the ATI 4850. It seems to be powerful enough for most games (especially most mac users arnt hardcore gamers). But the 4850 is MORE THAN good enough to play any game.
Want to be able to add storage that is NOT limited by a usb2 or firewire bus? Don't get an iMac.
The Firewire 800 is the best option right now imho. You can add 2TB external HDD and daisy chain them via fw 800. If not you can always buy a drobo and just firewire 800 it to the iMac with 8TB. USB 3.0 imo is overrated. In real world usage its about the same speed as the age old firewire 800. I suppose light peak is what we really want but that'll be a while.
I'd definitely agree if parts were obtained via Distributor Channels, but it's different in Direct procurement (Intel will know where they need to concentrate production to meet contract terms), and parts selection is part of those terms (vendor choses P/N and quantity per quarterly shipment).
USB 3.0 = 4.8Gb/s = 600MB/s
FireWire 800 = 800Mb/s = 100MB/s
So six times faster and you call it as fast as FW800? Sure it won't make much difference for your keyboard but there are many people who want to use externals at full speed which USB 3.0 can offer. FW80 on the other hand costs a bit extra too, HDs with it has an extra tenner or two because of it.
Ok you got me there on the USB 3.0 (should have done my research a bit more) but I think I make a good argument to the rest of the questions from the other poster. Either way, USB 3.0 will be fast but I doubt in real world usage it'll hit that full mark.
I'd like USB 3.0 for data transfer though because there is nothing else I'd really use from those gained speeds. But then I'd have to buy USB 3.0 enabled external HDD cases for all my external HDDs. FW800 is great for now.
The iMac screen is EXTREMELY glossy. It's a mirror. I had two of them, and unless you were on a BRIGHT screen it reflected, even when not placed near any windows. If you ran anything with a dark UI, you were looking at yourself.
On the issue of uniformity, the current iMac's are seriously flawed. It's just the bottom line. I tried two, both terrible. I've seen the bad units in the stores. Read the reports. Just because some of the millions of people who buy them are satisfied does not mean they are ok (see how that works?
). I think given the number of problems we are seeing on this forum, people needing to buy 6, 7 8 in a row before just quitting, it's safe to assume that the problems are epidemic. After all Apple talks about yellowed screens using LED backlighting in one of their patents. It's an issue, and it's ever present, and it's really bad. Certainly not something minor as some like to suggest. *shrug*Replacing hard drives...you shouldn't need to risk the build of your machine, and your monitor, to replace a hard drive. They should at the least just make a little door on the side or the back. You want to replace a hard drive on any desktop? Pop open the side, slide it into a tray and plug it in. You don't risk ruining anything by removing glass and getting behind your screen. I can build anything, but I wouldn't want to open an iMac.
The GPU isn't terrible, but it's an old mobile part. Don't Windows laptops feature better GPU's? Just saying...it's not even a choice...
As far as USB3 vs. firewire 800....I believe that is incorrect. I seem to remember USB3 being really close to SATA in the benchmarks, and SATA is a much better choice for your hard drives. Firewire 800 is "ok". It is far from a normal decent choice.
The iMac's are just not serious machines. They could be with a few minor changes, but right now they aren't.
I would buy and use an iMac if a second if they were improved.
Although it's a bit old, it's still almost the fastest mobile GPU available. It's just an underclocked desktop version thus very capable. Mobile 58xx use desktop 57xx thus mobile 5850 is actually slower than 4850. It's really a high-end mobile GPU, very few "laptops" have it and they sound like an airplane. I'm too lazy to look at some benches but I would guess it beats the NVidia GT 120 which is the default GPU of Mac Pro
eSATA + matte option would probably make iMac the new Mac Pro as they are the most crucial things people look for. Of course the lack of PCIe slots would be a hit though
IMHO the iMacs display is among the worst out in the market today. It's extremely glossy, when I'm working on a darker layout or whenever anything dark appears on the screen (be it a photo, movie, game, etc.) you can't make out any details anymore. And I don't even have a window or anything bright behind me. I made the mistake to buy an Alu-iMac instead of a Mac Pro 3 years ago – I will definitely not make it again.
Now that sounds like an idea. Add a little bit more features to the iMac and Apple might get away with it. There still would be an uproar, but sadly it sounds like something Apple might do.
No it really isn't. And even if it does "run" new games it wont do it well. You also have to buy the highest end iMac to get that now very underpowered video card. Its a mobile video card. Im not going to buy a desktop with laptop parts, I have a laptop for that reason.
It's just an underclocked desktop version. It's really the Ferrari of mobile GPUs. If iMac had lower resolution, it would play almost all games at high settings. A "laptop" with 4850 isn't a laptop anymore, it is noisy and clumsy brick.
Anyway, Macs aren't for gamers. Mac Pro for gaming would cost 3000$ + monitor and it's still slower than 1500$ PC
In the context of two screen set ups, how many folks need two matte, high color fidelity screens? If keep "color work" and menu bar on "external" screen and email/IM/reference manuals/etc. (i.e., not primary work task) on another screen then doesn't matter as much.
If trying to minimize system costs ( a single screen and single CPU package) then loose. iMac also isn't going to "1/2" the cost if packing 4 core and lots of RAM in it. The upper end iMac can trim off the folks who only really needed more cores and RAM.
It is a completely different story if want to get into "apples to oranges" where want to provide Mac Pro but with cheaper parts ( cut the power supply, dump ECC, cheapen the case , etc. )
Eventually everything has a 100% failure rate.
Decent to run photoshop ?
Disks are in the TB stage. Is there a good reason to keep your work project from 3 years ago live on your primary hard drive? It is one thing if most folks were going to access the files. It is quite another when more than a few folks have large numbers of files on their drive that haven't been accessed in years. Being capped in that context has little real impact. (other than having to do "spring cleaning" periodically. )
There is a gap between Mac Pro and iMac. However, it isn't as large as folks are making it out to be. Especially, in the areas that are close to the overlap in non-display hardware.
While there are folks who need higher I/O bandwidth, more flexibility, ability to store and secure more stuff inside a single cabinet, etc. , there were also folks who were buying Mac Pros not because it was the right fit, but because it was closest match (limited i/o, limited flexibility, etc. )
Even in terms of I/O. Not quite there yet but if added USB 3.0 and Lightpeak to an iMac there would fewer needs for PCI-e slots. The trendline is clear. No-slot boxes are going to be the mainstream even into the lower workstation space over the next couple of years. There are folks with legacy equipment and addicted to the familar form factor, but technically ... no reason why number of people covered by that solution won't get bigger.
The Mac market (in terms of units) is growing. You're going to have really hard time convincing Apple their strategy is doomed as long as they are selling more Macs this year than they sold last year.
As the PC market matures the trend only grows that larger groups of people buy from the small group of profitable large vendors. Apple isn't #1, but are in the top #10 in general and in the top #5 in subsegments.
If people move from lower end Mac Pros to iMacs ..... both of those put profits into the same bank account.
They aren't treating it as dying, but as mature. The race for the biggest winner in the PC market is over. Been over for long time. Apple can sit and treadwater around 4-6% . As long as they can keep it a constant 4-6% year over year and pull profits from the market it is not a losing strategy.
It is a market that is maturing. Hype doesn't have as much of an impact anymore. Being regular and being around is sufficient.
Additionally, as long as just and many folks leave in a huff because of no minitower are replaced by folks who don't want a minitower .... again nothing particularly wrong with the strategy from Apple's perspective.
The I/O of the pro is a need for the PROFESSIONAL (depending on trade of course) and PROSUMER ENTHUSIAST/INDEPENDENT PRODUCER.
A good share of above consumer HD camera's need-require PCI expansion and HD breakout cables. An iMac although a great asset in any arsenal is in no way, a flagship for a large Hollywood studio or the local wedding videographer.
As for storage, this is where I fall into prosumer, my iTunes library is nearly over 1TB. And only growing, that's just iTunes media, what about game media, and project media? 2TB is too small for me at this point, 4TB would be livable, but 8 would be ideal. A DROBO or PROMISE solution is definitely the route for iTunes, but the rest of my media, is headed to an 8TB pool.
A good share of above consumer HD camera's need-require PCI expansion and HD breakout cables. An iMac although a great asset in any arsenal is in no way, a flagship for a large Hollywood studio or the local wedding videographer.
As for storage, this is where I fall into prosumer, my iTunes library is nearly over 1TB. And only growing, that's just iTunes media, what about game media, and project media? 2TB is too small for me at this point, 4TB would be livable, but 8 would be ideal. A DROBO or PROMISE solution is definitely the route for iTunes, but the rest of my media, is headed to an 8TB pool.
Err...Steve Jobs IS recently quoted as basically saying traditional PC's are dying. He has stated it. That is of course HIS opinion, and not one that gels with the numbers.
I think it's a dangerous game to start acting like consumption is so much more important than production. That is after all what Apple is emphasizing. Instead of being the company for creative professionals to do work, they want to appeal to everyone with gadgets. OSX is needed to make software for these things though...that generally takes pros (or really great hobbyists). If you treat the pros like second rate citizens they will move on to something else. Does Apple think Android isn't going to continue to catch up?
You do realize Apple is neither being "regular" nor "sufficient" in many of their users eyes right? Thats's what this entire issue is about.
I personally criticize because I care. It boggles my mind that some people will defend absolutely anything this company does just because it's Apple. The bottom line is they just want as much money as possible, there is certainly no benevolent M.O. going on over there. That's why they've decided to dump the pros and chase the masses.
Suggesting things like usb2 or firewire is ok to dump data onto misses the point. What if we want SSD boot drives and fast data drives for audio production? What if we need a good gpu for 3D work and game dev? Why should we settle for Apple's table scraps? It just doesn't make any sense. I don't think many exclusive Apple users realize how good it is on the PC side. But people want to defend them to the death no matter what they do so...not much else to say!
I think it's a dangerous game to start acting like consumption is so much more important than production. That is after all what Apple is emphasizing. Instead of being the company for creative professionals to do work, they want to appeal to everyone with gadgets. OSX is needed to make software for these things though...that generally takes pros (or really great hobbyists). If you treat the pros like second rate citizens they will move on to something else. Does Apple think Android isn't going to continue to catch up?
You do realize Apple is neither being "regular" nor "sufficient" in many of their users eyes right? Thats's what this entire issue is about.
I personally criticize because I care. It boggles my mind that some people will defend absolutely anything this company does just because it's Apple. The bottom line is they just want as much money as possible, there is certainly no benevolent M.O. going on over there. That's why they've decided to dump the pros and chase the masses.
Suggesting things like usb2 or firewire is ok to dump data onto misses the point. What if we want SSD boot drives and fast data drives for audio production? What if we need a good gpu for 3D work and game dev? Why should we settle for Apple's table scraps? It just doesn't make any sense. I don't think many exclusive Apple users realize how good it is on the PC side. But people want to defend them to the death no matter what they do so...not much else to say!
Err...Steve Jobs IS recently quoted as basically saying traditional PC's are dying. He has stated it. That is of course HIS opinion, and not one that gels with the numbers.
I think it's a dangerous game to start acting like consumption is so much more important than production. That is after all what Apple is emphasizing. Instead of being the company for creative professionals to do work, they want to appeal to everyone with gadgets. OSX is needed to make software for these things though...that generally takes pros (or really great hobbyists). If you treat the pros like second rate citizens they will move on to something else. Does Apple think Android isn't going to continue to catch up?
You do realize Apple is neither being "regular" nor "sufficient" in many of their users eyes right? Thats's what this entire issue is about.
I personally criticize because I care. It boggles my mind that some people will defend absolutely anything this company does just because it's Apple. The bottom line is they just want as much money as possible, there is certainly no benevolent M.O. going on over there. That's why they've decided to dump the pros and chase the masses.
Suggesting things like usb2 or firewire is ok to dump data onto misses the point. What if we want SSD boot drives and fast data drives for audio production? What if we need a good gpu for 3D work and game dev? Why should we settle for Apple's table scraps? It just doesn't make any sense. I don't think many exclusive Apple users realize how good it is on the PC side. But people want to defend them to the death no matter what they do so...not much else to say!
Couldn't have said it better myself. I think the move towards iGadgets and so far away from computers and pro equipment is a huge and terrible risk. And that isn't good for anyone. I'd really miss OS X.
http://beta.thehindu.com/sci-tech/gadgets/article445394.ece
Think about it...iMovie on the iPhone? They are devoting resources to this while OSX and their apps, including the pro stuff, and iLife could stand for vast improvements?
http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2010/05/31/daily63.html
Think about it...iMovie on the iPhone? They are devoting resources to this while OSX and their apps, including the pro stuff, and iLife could stand for vast improvements?
http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2010/05/31/daily63.html
I considered the iMac, and I thought I would get one if I didnt see any Mac Pro updates by WWDC.
But the bottom line is that a single internal HDD and a single FW800 port just dont cut it. I could void my warranty and install a second HDD in place of the superdrive, but let's be serious for a second. I have to remove the screen in order to change the HDD. That is r-i-d-i-c-u-l-o-u-s. Know what else I have to do? Void the warranty. Void the warranty on a machine that is prone to issues that would have me NEEDING that warranty.
I wish it could work out, but the iMac is still inadequate.
But the bottom line is that a single internal HDD and a single FW800 port just dont cut it. I could void my warranty and install a second HDD in place of the superdrive, but let's be serious for a second. I have to remove the screen in order to change the HDD. That is r-i-d-i-c-u-l-o-u-s. Know what else I have to do? Void the warranty. Void the warranty on a machine that is prone to issues that would have me NEEDING that warranty.
I wish it could work out, but the iMac is still inadequate.
I'm with you on this. I mean, more power to those who do go out of their way to customize their iMac, but investments also need warranty, and that's just something I really value. I'm sorry, but until these are officially designated as "user-replaceable" by Apple, I'll gladly go for the Mac Pro.
Edit: Though I believe when light peak iMacs come around, this won't be an issue as most expansions will likely exist as external solutions. So we probably may never see user-replaceable internal hard drives or graphics cards for the iMac...ever... if that is, everything goes according to Apple's plan.