Mac Pro-Still worth it?

[gugucom]

I just hope they don't overprice it again this time!

Apple is a very marketing savvy outfit, so their pricing is supposed to be meditated and not arbitrary.....

Same here! Although I think now that Apple raised prices they would keep them hovering in that area... But Apple did lower the MacBook to $1K, so one never knows...

If opposite pricing trends happen to two different products of a company at the same time it usually means the product belong to different segments and therefore have different marketing strategies. Hence the price cut in mobile laptop cannot be relevant for the workstation desktop segment....

I know they are a company and must operate as such blah blah, but it seems every time I hear someone talk about them I'm reminded of how they value an extra .5% profit margin over the satisfaction of their loyal customers.

When a segment (workstation) is shrinking and Apple makes no effort to keep their relative market share a simple explanation is a cash out strategy for the Mac Pros. This would imply that the "over pricing" will be systematic in the future. In that case we might wonder how many tick tocks we are going to see for the product. Next year will be a tick year which is comparably cheap for Apple. There is no new micro structure and the update costs are going to be very moderate. 2011 with Sandy Bridge will be an expensive tock year and they may start thinking about return on that R&D investment. I'd love to see their Mac Pro sales figures for the last eight quarters. Unfortunately they are always burried in desktop.

 

[Winni]

I mean, to have an OSX-like-interface and UNIX enviroment.... We can steal ZFS for a filesystem

You don't have to do it yourself. Canonical is already doing a good job here. Just look at the current Ubuntu 9.10 beta and, just for kicks, activate GLX-Cairo Dock and the "Dust" theme in Gnome. It'll look much nicer and feel a lot faster than OS X Snow Leopard -- on the same machine, by the way.

As an alternative, you can also try Novell's SuSE Linux. They're doing a lot of interesting things for the desktop, too.

But the problem with Linux is the lack of professional software that has nothing to do with programming or networking. If you need something in the league of Aperture, Photoshop, Final Cut or Logic or Reason, or any ordinary business software, you're completely SOL. Linux is an awesome environment for networking and programming, and it also makes a good surf board or a home user desktop (provided that the home user is an IT guy), but that's about it.

So, unless you have a couple of billions of dollars to burn, I wouldn't even think about pushing a desktop alternative to Windows or OS X on the market. You're guaranteed to fail.

Oh -- and a word about the programming skills required to create a desktop systems: They're the least of your worries. That's what the whole Linux community just doesn't get. You need well designed and thought-out interface designs. Implementing that stuff is MUCH simpler than designing and engineering it. (Which, maybe, also explains why most software engineers will agree that it is much harder to invent a programming language than to write an operating system.)

 

[Tesselator]

Apple is a very marketing savvy outfit, so their pricing is supposed to be meditated and not arbitrary.....

If it's meditated and not arbitrary then it's meditated for the purpose of phasing out the Mac Pro line all together in just three short years. Currently and for the foreseeable future there just aren't enough people willing to pay $2000 for an Apple sticker, a reduced application set, and the inability to overclock or even select the video card they may happen to want.

I like the platform and all. It seems at least, to present a viable alternative to the evil empire. But they kinda dropped a big brown nugget in 2009. A few repeats of that ie. maintaing the course, I would at least think, would spell the complete death of the line. Apple doesn't publish or release in any way that I know of the sales figures for any specific Macintosh line so it's not really possible to know if MP's were up or down in 2009. If it were put to me to speculate on I would guess down by half just off the top of my head.



.

 

[TheStrudel]

Oh -- and a word about the programming skills required to create a desktop systems: They're the least of your worries. That's what the whole Linux community just doesn't get. You need well designed and thought-out interface designs. Implementing that stuff is MUCH simpler than designing and engineering it. (Which, maybe, also explains why most software engineers will agree that it is much harder to invent a programming language than to write an operating system.)

This. I've watched the software industry fail to understand, for decades now, that the user experience is more important than underlying technology. Otherwise, we'd all still be operating CLIs.

You can bet that  hasn't succeeded just because their hardware looks suave. It was kind of funny watching the tech industry failing to "get" the iPod - it was software, not hardware that sold the thing.

Which is why more or less all of the desktop environments in common usage now still bear too much resemblance to the Macintosh of 1984. I think much better OS paradigms could be developed, but nobody has any real idea what they might look like and it is, as Winni pointed out, super expensive to even try something new.

 

[Gomff]

I'm not convinced Apple would so easily phase out the Mac Pro, there's too much kudos attached to the product line. The top spec Macs have been at home in equally suave design studios for years and Apple love being associated with high design and performance. For them to stop producing a computer capable of top level video editing seems unthinkable.

I could be wrong, and maybe it's hope talking but I think it's a slice of the market that Apple would hate to lose, not to mention actively surrender.

This year's Mac Pro's aren't great value for money, although they are fantastic machines. Last years were both though

 

[gugucom]

I'm not convinced Apple would so easily phase out the Mac Pro, there's too much kudos attached to the product line. The top spec Macs have been at home in equally suave design studios for years and Apple love being associated with high design and performance. For them to stop producing a computer capable of top level video editing seems unthinkable.

It may be unthinkable for those who don't look at the wider picture. In the end Apple's future is in iPhones, Apps Store, iTunes and Laptops. Mac mini and iMac are essentially laptop tech desktops with higher synergy towards the laptops than the Mac Pro. Apple might be prepared to carry on with the Mac Pro but only if it generates margins compared to their growth business. They know bloody well that the shares price isn't influenced by a small group of video and audio professionals using high end Apple workstations. A few millions in Hollywood product placements will more than compensate for that.

 

[Gomff]

It may be unthinkable for those who don't look at the wider picture. In the end Apple's future is in iPhones, Apps Store, iTunes and Laptops. Mac mini and iMac are essentially laptop tech desktops with higher synergy towards the laptops than the Mac Pro. Apple might be prepared to carry on with the Mac Pro but only if it generates margins compared to their growth business. They know bloody well that the shares price isn't influenced by a small group of video and audio professionals using high end Apple workstations. A few millions in Hollywood product placements will more than compensate for that.

You may be right, but a large part of Apple's brand identity is aspirational. It's a key thing that separates them from just being another tech company. Being associated with top level design is also a big part of the Apple psyche. If Apple lose those, you can bet it will be reflected in the share price.

I just can't see Apple capitulating and letting Windows and Linux systems monopolise the workstation market....Especially after making the switch to Intel and being able to compete genuinely on performance rather than relying on what were always slightly "iffy" benchmarks in the old powerPC days.

 

[Dr.Pants]

When I said that "we" (We-Make-Apple-Esque-Machines LLC) could make a hardware/software platform that would have relative success in the professional field, I knew that success would have to be completely revolutionary. Like TheStrudel said, every OS bears a certain familiarity to one another, and nobody knows what the next big thing will be (otherwise it would be implemented already).

I know its not some small task to design/code an OS. I know that any large software project requires TEAMS of people - something I can't grasp, and I prove that with the thread in the help forum labeled "Need to RTFM on Networking and Bash". Anything new would require lots of money to burn, and nobody wants to burn money unless there's a chance it will rise like a pheonix to pay off the debt burden. Which is why, to create not only a successful OS, one needs to have software support from third-party vendors, but then need to assure vendors that the hardware/software platform isn't going to flop... the list goes on. Its a clerical nightmare. However, I can see the need for alternative OSes and long-term hardware support. It isn't a large niche, but its there. Enough to justify the massive expenditure?

Maybe if the larger options gets too overpriced and/or incompetent (Microsoft/Apple/add-name-here).

 

[TheStrudel]

Shrug. The OS market is going to fragment in a decade or two. I can't believe it's gone on as long as it has, especially given that Linux is free.

That said, Linux is no real substitute for an OS designed for user experience from the ground up and sold as a real competitor to windows. But I think one is coming, eventually. I'm hoping that soon enough, no one vendor controls more than 25% of the market. Then maybe  will actually be forced to compete. And before anybody asks, they're not really competing with Windows.

 

[nanofrog]

When I said that "we" (We-Make-Apple-Esque-Machines LLC) could make a hardware/software platform that would have relative success in the professional field, I knew that success would have to be completely revolutionary. Like TheStrudel said, every OS bears a certain familiarity to one another, and nobody knows what the next big thing will be (otherwise it would be implemented already).

I know its not some small task to design/code an OS. I know that any large software project requires TEAMS of people - something I can't grasp, and I prove that with the thread in the help forum labeled "Need to RTFM on Networking and Bash". Anything new would require lots of money to burn, and nobody wants to burn money unless there's a chance it will rise like a pheonix to pay off the debt burden. Which is why, to create not only a successful OS, one needs to have software support from third-party vendors, but then need to assure vendors that the hardware/software platform isn't going to flop... the list goes on. Its a clerical nightmare. However, I can see the need for alternative OSes and long-term hardware support. It isn't a large niche, but its there. Enough to justify the massive expenditure?

Maybe if the larger options gets too overpriced and/or incompetent (Microsoft/Apple/add-name-here).

Winni's made a really good point. There's a lot to it. Really.

You'd have to create what it's to look like, features, usability,... before you code anything. A developmental roadmap. Then you'd have to create the API's for a programming language. Then at best, build off the basis of an existing OS, such as Unix (saves time, as you build off something that's known to work). It's time consuming as is, and expensive. And in the end, it's evolutionary, not revolutionary. That's the reason it happens this way.

To do the later, you have to do every single step, and it's beyond daunting, and expensive for the corporate world. So something like this is more likely to be the result of a small group, and likely a garage operation that spent years (if not a decade) on it. Seriously. It's not impossible, but the odds aren't great.

Shrug. The OS market is going to fragment in a decade or two. I can't believe it's gone on as long as it has, especially given that Linux is free.

That said, Linux is no real substitute for an OS designed for user experience from the ground up and sold as a real competitor to windows. But I think one is coming, eventually. I'm hoping that soon enough, no one vendor controls more than 25% of the market. Then maybe  will actually be forced to compete. And before anybody asks, they're not really competing with Windows.

Something like this could be built off Linux, but it would take a consistency in design to happen (singular developmental model), rather than the current state of Linux (it's not horrible, and I like Linux, but not where it needs to be to take on MS). There's multiple builds, and they can be quite different from one another in appearance. They've the programming talent, but there's too many different ideologies mixed in, and it can seem like a mess, as it's not as consistent as it could be. Or needs to be to take on professionally developed OS's (i.e. very well funded develoment teams).

 

[Dr.Pants]

Winni's made a really good point. There's a lot to it. Really.

You'd have to create what it's to look like, features, usability,... before you code anything. A developmental roadmap. Then you'd have to create the API's for a programming language. Then at best, build off the basis of an existing OS, such as Unix (saves time, as you build off something that's known to work). It's time consuming as is, and expensive. And in the end, it's evolutionary, not revolutionary. That's the reason it happens this way.

To do the later, you have to do every single step, and it's beyond daunting, and expensive for the corporate world. So something like this is more likely to be the result of a small group, and likely a garage operation that spent years (if not a decade) on it. Seriously. It's not impossible, but the odds aren't great.

*Chem major here

.. Precisely. I'm sorry if I didn't communicate the fact enough early on that making a revolutionary OS isn't done overnight or is not a major investment. Its just that the drive to revolt or evolve is there when the current offerings leave one slightly off-kilter; today there are people complaining about each and every OS and their faults. OSX comes from a company that cares less about it then its consumer products. Windows is trying to make a comback and desperatly hold onto its market share. Linux is splintered. Solaris doesn't have a whole lot of software. BSD?

Anyways, who knows where the next real OSes that can be marketed will come from? All that I know is that cross-platform serving and cross-platform software needs to start leaking out for real acceptance. I also happen to mirror the words of TheStrudel as well.

The OS market is going to fragment in a decade or two. I can't believe it's gone on as long as it has, especially given that Linux is free.... I'm hoping that soon enough, no one vendor controls more than 25% of the market. Then maybe  will actually be forced to compete.

Or at least in the above context I edited it down to.

Diversity and competition are good things. I would love to design an OS to compete. But, when it comes down to it, ideas splatter (or make idea-sized-holes) in the n00b wall. I'll be lucky to begin C++ winter quarter. And its not like any crack-pot innovation I (and/or friends of mine) come up with would gain the support the likes of Adobe and Autodesk (which is what would be necessary for a professional-target-market, as stated earlier).

Those companies concern themselves with largest-market-share OSes that have proprietary control of their userbase so, in essence, their products also have a relative measure of control. Releasing something for Linux would make a scramble for unofficial support on every platform, AFAIK (Real Life could be different and I Just Ate My Shoe There).

Maybe Fiction OS will bear fruit and gain popularity. But not in this decade, at least.

 

[nanofrog]

.. Precisely. I'm sorry if I didn't communicate the fact enough early on that making a revolutionary OS isn't done overnight or is not a major investment. Its just that the drive to revolt or evolve is there when the current offerings leave one slightly off-kilter; today there are people complaining about each and every OS and their faults. OSX comes from a company that cares less about it then its consumer products. Windows is trying to make a comback and desperatly hold onto its market share. Linux is splintered. Solaris doesn't have a whole lot of software. BSD?

NP.

Apple's in a good position, but they're not interested at all. It would make it much harder to do when it has to work with basically any system out there (additional drivers and debugging from hell). Some exceptions of course, and are those that don't use Intel or AMD processors, unless it's decided to be made functional on those as well.

Anyways, who knows where the next real OSes that can be marketed will come from? All that I know is that cross-platform serving and cross-platform software needs to start leaking out for real acceptance. I also happen to mirror the words of TheStrudel as well.

Really hard to say. That's why I really do think it will come out of a previously unknown source, such as a garage with a hand full of serious software geeks.

Diversity and competition are good things. I would love to design an OS to compete. But, when it comes down to it, ideas splatter (or make idea-sized-holes) in the n00b wall. I'll be lucky to begin C++ winter quarter. And its not like any crack-pot innovation I (and/or friends of mine) come up with would gain the support the likes of Adobe and Autodesk (which is what would be necessary for a professional-target-market, as stated earlier).

I agree competition is needed. Otherwise the computer tech will stagnate. I really fear a situation where Intel is the only silicon maker left. The P4 was horrible, and it would be worse if AMD truly folds.

As per what you and your friends are capable of, who knows. It could actually happen. Most of the really innovative work, at least the basic ideas can come from the young, as their minds are far less cluttered than those that have been focused on other things for too many years. That kind of change to one's thought patterns isn't an easy feat.

Those companies concern themselves with largest-market-share OSes that have proprietary control of their userbase so, in essence, their products also have a relative measure of control. Releasing something for Linux would make a scramble for unofficial support on every platform, AFAIK (Real Life could be different and I Just Ate My Shoe There).

If they're creating the standards, then absolutely. It kind of depends on who gets there first, and what sort of standards board may be brought into existance. Standards by committee can be problematic, as there's a tendancy for too many compromises. But they're needed to ensure interoperational compatibility as you know.

Maybe Fiction OS will bear fruit and gain popularity. But not in this decade, at least.

Not likely gonna happen in a year, unless the code monkeys have been in hiding while inventing it since the beginning of this one.

 

[Tesselator]

Maybe Fiction OS will bear fruit and gain popularity. But not in this decade, at least.

I dunno, I watched BeOS go from just an idea to full release and full popularity in about a year or two. IMO if you want an OS that rocks the world of current OS's the metaphor itself needs to change radically. No more desk-top, workbench, flat icons. Something much more creative and outside the box needs to be realized.

 

[nanofrog]

I dunno, I watched BeOS go from just an idea to full release and full popularity in about a year or two. IMO if you want an OS that rocks the world of current OS's the metaphor itself needs to change radically. No more desk-top, workbench, flat icons. Something much more creative and outside the box needs to be realized.

It took ~4 years to develop to the initial release, so you could call it 5 - 6.

That was still quick to go from nothing (idea) to release that worked that well. They had some really talented people, and the resources to finance it though. Sad it died.

But to get past the 2D part, why not skip a 2D display, and go with VR, or better yet, wait until a Human Neural Interface is perfected (a few are working on it). No monitor, just "in your head". Then you can get true 3D.

 

[Eidorian]

It's tough unless you make a living under OS X. That makes it a business expense though. Then again what are we doing here again?

 

[Alkhemist]

Tesselator, this isn't related to this thread, but i had no else way to contact you. Did you succeed in modifying the case for the mac pro? I'm planning on doing the same thing. Which case did you use, and would you possibly have pictures on the process of installation? I would be grateful. thanks.

 

[Dr.Pants]

NP.

Apple's in a good position, but they're not interested at all. It would make it much harder to do when it has to work with basically any system out there (additional drivers and debugging from hell). Some exceptions of course, and are those that don't use Intel or AMD processors, unless it's decided to be made functional on those as well.

Too many pronouns! Its late, lol.

Well, in terms of making the OS work with drivers and such, I guess why it would be an idea to lock a new OS into certain hardware - not as a control, but just as a way for a fledgling company to put a product out. Debug and support the hardware base, but YMMV on "as of release" unsupported hardware, and add hardware support with each additional release.

No wonder Microsoft's crazy

Really hard to say. That's why I really do think it will come out of a previously unknown source, such as a garage with a hand full of serious software geeks. ...Most of the really innovative work, at least the basic ideas can come from the young, as their minds are far less cluttered than those that have been focused on other things for too many years. That kind of change to one's thought patterns isn't an easy feat.

Hmmm... Yes indeed. I agree on the fact that there could be some people doing work for a new OS. Should I be sending you a PM? I mean, a question about hardware!

However, innovation can come from older minds as well; you should meet some people my age. Its unfortunate that they get ingrained with the fact that MSoft is the only real software manufacturor, and everyone else is kooky. A wise old guy (I wonder who I could be referring to) might have some damn good ideas as well. Evolution or Revolution.

When it comes down to the two, I think that an evolution is the most likely thing to happen... Just because it works. Make what works better. Optimisation. Its weird. Now that I just talked myself into it, I'm not thinking of all these strange UI ideas. ((I won't go into them for everybody's sake)) They click with efficient and tidy, though not the most important; easy to learn. One idea I had I literally scribbled "User gets lost on sphere"; that would have been phail!

I agree competition is needed. Otherwise the computer tech will stagnate. I really fear a situation where Intel is the only silicon maker left. The P4 was horrible, and it would be worse if AMD truly folds.

I also fear this as well. I liked one P4 machine (3GHz+, IIRC) I had, but it had an unfortunate accident... But compared with the amount of processing power I got out of an AM2, it sucked air like a breached lab vent. I don't want another Pentium 4. And while Intel is the main chipmaker so far (after it gained ground from AMD), its mainly because the architecture dominates the world after Windows only supported IA-32.

But I think AMD tanking is far from happening. Hopefully other architectures won't, too... The Cell is a wonderful thing IMO, and the rest of IBM's line are pretty potent. I'd like to see SPARC back in the mainstream.

If they're creating the standards, then absolutely. It kind of depends on who gets there first, and what sort of standards board may be brought into existance. Standards by committee can be problematic, as there's a tendancy for too many compromises. But they're needed to ensure interoperational compatibility as you know.

HTML5? From what I understand some browser makers/programmers would have a hard time licensing some of the formats to be used as standard (H.264 for example), but at the same time I thought HTML5 was supposed to be the standard to replace Flash.... not that there is anything wrong with it, but since Flash was there first, it has kinda become a standard. I don't like it because some people act like it is when it isn't. Some people use it as a crux on the web (although I shouldn't judge!)

Not likely gonna happen in a year, unless the code monkeys have been in hiding while inventing it since the beginning of this one.

If you put a billion monkeys on all the recycled Optiplexes they are bound to spit out a new OS by sheer odds . WE're giving Shakspear a run for the money!

I dunno, I watched BeOS go from just an idea to full release and full popularity in about a year or two. IMO if you want an OS that rocks the world of current OS's the metaphor itself needs to change radically. No more desk-top, workbench, flat icons. Something much more creative and outside the box needs to be realized.

It took ~4 years to develop to the initial release, so you could call it 5 - 6.

That was still quick to go from nothing (idea) to release that worked that well. They had some really talented people, and the resources to finance it though. Sad it died.

Doesn't its spirit still live on as Haiku? I thought that was BeOS-based....

But to get past the 2D part, why not skip a 2D display, and go with VR, or better yet, wait until a Human Neural Interface is perfected (a few are working on it). No monitor, just "in your head". Then you can get true 3D.

If I fully replied to this, the immediate response would be "Ghost in the Shell fan detected"

Tesselator, this isn't related to this thread, but i had no else way to contact you. Did you succeed in modifying the case for the mac pro? I'm planning on doing the same thing. Which case did you use, and would you possibly have pictures on the process of installation? I would be grateful. thanks.

See attached image for the start to learning how to PM. Sorry if it seems dick-ish. Starting your own thread isn't a bad idea, either Or Mroogle

 

[Tesselator]

Tesselator, this isn't related to this thread, but i had no else way to contact you. Did you succeed in modifying the case for the mac pro? I'm planning on doing the same thing. Which case did you use, and would you possibly have pictures on the process of installation? I would be grateful. thanks.

Modifying the case? I don't remember planning that. I remember once I thought I was going to be able to install 12 HDDs via some "creative internal mods" but I haven't done it yet. Is that what you're talking about?

Anyway, I guess you can PM me.

 

[Dr.Pants]

Modifying the case? I don't remember planning that. I remember once I thought I was going to be able to install 12 HDDs via some "creative internal mods" but I haven't done it yet. Is that what you're talking about?

Anyway, I guess you can PM me.

I feel like the king of OT right now with my above post. On second thought, what Alkhemist asked it is relevant unlike the OS rants - what sort of creative mod did you have in mind, Tess?. I assume as well you would be using a SATA card or the like?

I actually just meant to point something out earlier with the image. Does a member need to have 5 posts to PM? In that case, I feel like a Grade-A Dill-Hole.

 

[Tesselator]

I feel like the king of OT right now with my above post. On second thought, what Alkhemist asked it is relevant unlike the OS rants - what sort of creative mod did you have in mind, Tess?. I assume as well you would be using a SATA card or the like?

I was going to build my own tray that would in 1 piece, hold 3 drives across and 3 high.

I actually just meant to point something out earlier with the image. Does a member need to have 5 posts to PM? In that case, I feel like a Grade-A Dill-Hole.

Naw, I wouldn't worry. We all blow minor chunks from time to time.

 

[nanofrog]

Hmmm... Yes indeed. I agree on the fact that there could be some people doing work for a new OS. Should I be sending you a PM? I mean, a question about hardware!

Sure. But I make no promises on a satisfactory response.

However, innovation can come from older minds as well; you should meet some people my age. Its unfortunate that they get ingrained with the fact that MSoft is the only real software manufacturor, and everyone else is kooky. A wise old guy (I wonder who I could be referring to) might have some damn good ideas as well. Evolution or Revolution.

Hey... I'm not that old. Under 40 anyway. Just not by much.

Education and experience can take the imagination and willingness to try risky ventures out of an individual. It can happen at a young age, and get worse over time.

When it comes down to the two, I think that an evolution is the most likely thing to happen... Just because it works. Make what works better. Optimisation. Its weird. Now that I just talked myself into it, I'm not thinking of all these strange UI ideas. ((I won't go into them for everybody's sake)) They click with efficient and tidy, though not the most important; easy to learn. One idea I had I literally scribbled "User gets lost on sphere"; that would have been phail!

From a tactical POV, it makes more sense to take the evolutionary path, as it at least gives the impression that positive results are attainable. Not so much when considering an attempt at "re-inventing the wheel" as it were.

But I think AMD tanking is far from happening. Hopefully other architectures won't, too... The Cell is a wonderful thing IMO, and the rest of IBM's line are pretty potent. I'd like to see SPARC back in the mainstream.

I don't think AMD is in any immediate danger either, but who knows what they're hiding in their balance sheets. "Toxic paper" has affected many industries, and I don't think we've seen the full extent yet.

HTML5?

I don't see it as a replacement for Flash, but who knows. It's not a formal standard yet, and time will tell. I probably don't follow it as closely as I should.

If you put a billion monkeys on all the recycled Optiplexes they are bound to spit out a new OS by sheer odds . WE're giving Shakspear a run for the money!

Hmm... New OS... Maybe. But I'd think a video game called "Banana's" is more likely.

Doesn't its spirit still live on as Haiku? I thought that was BeOS-based....

Spirit is a good way to put it, as the code's been almost completely re-written, if it not entirely.

I remember once I thought I was going to be able to install 12 HDDs via some "creative internal mods" but I haven't done it yet. Is that what you're talking about?

Technical difficulties (i.e. where the heck to put it) or time?

 

[Tesselator]

Technical difficulties (i.e. where the heck to put it) or time?

I haven't measured it out yet but when I looked it looked easily doable. I doubt I'll ever do it though so it's not important.

 

[nanofrog]

I haven't measured it out yet but when I looked it looked easily doable. I doubt I'll ever do it though so it's not important.

Why waste the effort then.