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 Supplies Tightening as WWDC Approaches
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I was thinking in selling my Mac Pro but is like $400 :s
And just this week I was taking a look at the Silicon Graphics and reading the aspects of the old desktop models, I was just day dreaming with a Mac with 32 processors, 16 GB of Video Ram, 92 terabites of Ram... =)
And just this week I was taking a look at the Silicon Graphics and reading the aspects of the old desktop models, I was just day dreaming with a Mac with 32 processors, 16 GB of Video Ram, 92 terabites of Ram... =)
quit chasing the high end man, it's a never ending road and music sounded better with a G5
Whatever the new MacPro brings at WWDC, you can be sure it will be modeled properly in oder to reveal it's "thinness". Followed by the obligatory applause, oooooohs and awwwwws of course.
Surprised to hear that apple doesn't necessarily have the highest priced product on the market or what?
When I last needed a dual socket machine, I bought a Mac Pro because it was pretty much the cheapest option I could find - including building my own white box system. I tried to live with the limitations of osx for a while too, but shudder at the thought of me running an apple branded machine without a single osx partition
I'd love for that to be the case again, but I'm not too hopeful - If they go for a single core i7/Xeon, it'll (carry on) being massively overpriced. Aesthetics etc couldn't be less interesting to me on a workstation, not sure why this is being mentioned. If I was loopy and was making my decision based on looks/build, I'd go with a nice solid steel caged machine, in black from hp/dell/supermicro/etc. One of the only features people might really need from 'a box' of components that are made by the same semiconductor firms is the ability to slide in a rack - apple love to keep their consumer product lines simple(ish), but they forgot to apply this to the Mac Pro when removing the Xserve! - I wish they'd rid the world of the atrocity that is osx server though!
And anyway, seems like a strange time to push a refresh (at intel's mercy...)
There's a reason why the Mac Pro is so large. It provides a cool, very quiet experience even running at maximum load. It also contains a lot of space for internal storage and PCI slots, as well as lots of RAM. It has lots of external ports (and I often wish it had more, but that's where PCI slots come in). It's so large because to make it smaller would be to ruin all the reasons why people buy it. It is not a consumer machine subject to the consumer's whims.
The optical drives are just about obsolete, and I don't think too many people would mind giving them up, but I think there's enough Pros who want at least one. Well, they can buy an external easily enough, if it comes to it.
The Mac Pro is the one product in their entire lineup they are never going to make smaller just to make it smaller, because Pros don't buy their workstations to be pretty. They'd need a very good reason to do it. What reason could they possibly have? More efficient CPUs might mean they need less cooling to keep the computer quiet and running well. A lack of demand for optical drives might save some space too. Pros are still going to want lots of internal storage, full sized dedicated graphics cards (plural), and as much RAM as they can possibly fit.
Ever open up a Mac Pro? Even the 1,1 was a work of art. The latest ones are so well designed and beautiful inside that they are a joy to add or replace hardware in. The outside, who cares? It's not supposed to look pretty, it's supposed to be utilitarian. I think Apple did a fine job making it look clean and impressive on the outside, so much nicer looking than its competitors, but the true beauty is on the inside, in how it operates and what you can put inside it.
Anyone complaining about its size or weight or looks probably doesn't need a Mac Pro. The only valid criticism about its design is that it's not easily rack-mounted. Oh, and the handles kind of dig into your hands sharply. I wouldn't mind more rounded handles. Everything else has a really good reason to be that way, and Apple shouldn't (and probably won't) change that design unless it improves a Pro's user experience.
And if the Mac Pro isn't selling very well, it doesn't make a lot of sense to spend a lot of time and money redesigning its aesthetics anyway. Just keep making the same box forever that can easily fit off-the-shelf internals.
The optical drives are just about obsolete, and I don't think too many people would mind giving them up, but I think there's enough Pros who want at least one. Well, they can buy an external easily enough, if it comes to it.
The Mac Pro is the one product in their entire lineup they are never going to make smaller just to make it smaller, because Pros don't buy their workstations to be pretty. They'd need a very good reason to do it. What reason could they possibly have? More efficient CPUs might mean they need less cooling to keep the computer quiet and running well. A lack of demand for optical drives might save some space too. Pros are still going to want lots of internal storage, full sized dedicated graphics cards (plural), and as much RAM as they can possibly fit.
Ever open up a Mac Pro? Even the 1,1 was a work of art. The latest ones are so well designed and beautiful inside that they are a joy to add or replace hardware in. The outside, who cares? It's not supposed to look pretty, it's supposed to be utilitarian. I think Apple did a fine job making it look clean and impressive on the outside, so much nicer looking than its competitors, but the true beauty is on the inside, in how it operates and what you can put inside it.
Anyone complaining about its size or weight or looks probably doesn't need a Mac Pro. The only valid criticism about its design is that it's not easily rack-mounted. Oh, and the handles kind of dig into your hands sharply. I wouldn't mind more rounded handles. Everything else has a really good reason to be that way, and Apple shouldn't (and probably won't) change that design unless it improves a Pro's user experience.
And if the Mac Pro isn't selling very well, it doesn't make a lot of sense to spend a lot of time and money redesigning its aesthetics anyway. Just keep making the same box forever that can easily fit off-the-shelf internals.
Don't know if you are being facetious or not since many have not gone 10.8 yet, but I'd bet 10.8.4 will be minimum IF it ships soon (assuming its actually announced). Apple rarely makes hardware that runs on older OSes that what's out when h/w first ships.
Oh and anyone who thinks a consumer-grade single-CPU option with non-ECC RAM is comparable to a Xeon set-up is simply insane.
Are you drunk?
More are going from Apple to other vendors.
So you mean to tell me that HP lost 3-4% of the PC market share and Dell lost 0.5-1% of the market share while Apple picked up and additional 0.5-1% of the PC market share because customers were leaving Mac and going to Dell & HP?!?
So I guess you don't really know anything about business and the type of customers each of these companies target.
Oh, and as much as I'd love to see a new MP, I'd much rather see an updated ATD with *gasp* 4 USB3 ports as well as 3D support. I'm not expecting a large panel Retina display anytime soon.
One outside possibility ... AMD released the new Jaguar based Opterons this week. They are the lowpower APUs (SoC with CPU w/GPU) that have been announced for the xBox One and PS4.
One of those would be killer in a MacMini.
They are also cheap as hell. A MacPro (or mini-tower) with 2 or 4 Opteron chips would be very quite, cheap (to build) and powerful.
Plus it would make even more sense for their new Orlando office.
One of those would be killer in a MacMini.
They are also cheap as hell. A MacPro (or mini-tower) with 2 or 4 Opteron chips would be very quite, cheap (to build) and powerful.
Plus it would make even more sense for their new Orlando office.
something is fishy here
Something is really fishy here. It's way too early for Ivy Bridge Xeons. I could maybe buy an early announcement at WWDC (but why though?) with actual shipping some time in the Fall but that would have nothing at all to do with the current Mac Pro supply tightening. A new and immediately shipping Mac Pro with Sandy Bridge Xeon? Seems like an odd time for that (could have been done a year ago).
Something is really fishy here. It's way too early for Ivy Bridge Xeons. I could maybe buy an early announcement at WWDC (but why though?) with actual shipping some time in the Fall but that would have nothing at all to do with the current Mac Pro supply tightening. A new and immediately shipping Mac Pro with Sandy Bridge Xeon? Seems like an odd time for that (could have been done a year ago).
LOL its a partial screen shot... and (2) 27" monitors... still about $1500 less then my MacPro. Its really really fast, the one i built with the nvidia 680 is even better....
Both facetious and hopeful.
I would like some new H/W, but won't go beyond SL. (Two apps you won't find on my Mac are iTunes and AppStore).Riiiight...
Unless it has 4 Titans and 4 12-core Xeons @ 5Ghz, has Blu-Ray, HBO and makes coffee for 3,000 USD after taxes... I don't see how the complaining will stop...
No coffee.... green tea here.
I'm not opposed to building one, I'm just apprehensive due to potential stability issues if you don't get everything just right. Some people may be happy with something that only crashes once a week but not me. Waiting to see what WWDC presents before I spend any time designing the "perfect" Hackintosh.