Mac Pro (the most configurable mac or not...)

[jmggs]

I have bought a mac pro because is highly configurable. Now i going to sell it.
this a 2006 macpro EFI32, there is no graphic cards the expansion is too limited for a machine that have cost $2000. with that price i have bought a pc and today i can reuse some parts to make a better machine. Apple just want to you keep spend a too much money in a machine that is too limited in terms of expansion. how many graphics cards you have? 3 or 4 and the new ones don't work because apple don't want.

I love mac i will keep my macbook pro, my ipod, but a mac pro i think is a wast of money for a too limited machine in short term.

 

[surflordca]

Be my guest and go back to the PC where you belong and have all the Windows headaches...

 

[jmggs]

Be my guest and go back to the PC where you belong and have all the Windows headaches...

i'am going back to pc but i work all day in a PC with cubase, avid with no headaches, i think is more difficult to most users don't have problems in windows, you need to know more about computers them in mac.

PS. Sometimes i have problems in mac too.

Mac Pro are too expensive for a machine that is not expandable in short term.

 

[Dr.Pants]

Mac Pro are too expensive for a machine that is not expandable in short term.

What? Do you mean long term? I assume that's what you meant.

I would argue with that statement, though - I was under the impression that the 4870 could go in a MacPro 1.1. Also, did you attempt to swap out processors? A machine is as expandable as much as you want to expand it, and you may not have researched all of your options. I'm even more limited with a G5 (purchased this year), and I happen to make my ends meet.

 

[jmggs]

What? Do you mean long term? I assume that's what you meant.

I would argue with that statement, though - I was under the impression that the 4870 could go in a MacPro 1.1. Also, did you attempt to swap out processors? A machine is as expandable as much as you want to expand it, and you may not have researched all of your options. I'm even more limited with a G5 (purchased this year), and I happen to make my ends meet.

maybe mid term, why there is so poor offer of graphic cards. I want to upgrade the graphic card to something up to date with a good price.

 

[lbodnar]

I have bought a mac pro because is highly configurable.

To be fair to Apple, Mac Pro has never been promoted as a machine with extraordinary longevity. It is reasonably configurable when it is a current model but no-one promised to keep it fresh with upgrades.
Have Power Mac G4 or G5 been more long-lasting? No.

If you want to permanently have the flashiest and the beefiest computer in the neighbourhood, stay with PCs and rotate them every 6 month replacing CPUs, motherboards, PSU, cases, etc. What is the problem?

 

[jmggs]

To be fair to Apple, Mac Pro has never been promoted as a machine with extraordinary longevity. It is reasonably configurable when it is a current model but no-one promised to keep it fresh with upgrades.
Have Power Mac G4 or G5 been more long-lasting? No.

If you want to permanently have the flashiest and the beefiest computer in the neighbourhood, stay with PCs and rotate them every 6 month replacing CPUs, motherboards, PSU, cases, etc. What is the problem?

Thats true, but my machine when i bought was advertised has a true 64bit machine and is not, having a EFI32 that blocks some updates. and i can't boot Snow Leopard at 64bit in a machine advertised as 64bit, but i can use windows 7 64bit.

 

[lbodnar]

Thats true, but my machine when i bought was advertised has a true 64bit machine and is not, having a EFI32 that blocks some updates. and i can't boot Snow Leopard at 64bit in a machine advertised as 64bit, but i can use windows 7 64bit.

It has not been advertised as "true 64bit machine", it has been advertised to have a 64-bit CPU: http://web.archive.org/web/20060822123855/www.apple.com/macpro/intelxeon.html

...Intel designed this dual-core Xeon to be more efficient, it consumes less power than similar workstation-level processors, so your system fans don’t have to work as hard to keep them cool. Working hand in glove with Mac OS X Tiger, it also continues the tradition of enabling 64-bit computation. Ideal for scientific applications, the 64-bit Intel Xeon processors can express the extreme precision needed for floating-point mathematics and to express integers up to 18 billion billion. It also allows Mac Pro to surpass the 4GB memory limit of 32-bit processors.

The fact that OS produced in 2009 can't use some features of 2006 machine is hardly the machine's fault, isn't it?

 

[nanofrog]

It has not been advertised as "true 64bit machine", it has been advertised to have a 64-bit CPU: http://web.archive.org/web/20060822123855/www.apple.com/macpro/intelxeon.html

The fact that OS produced in 2009 can't use some features of 2006 machine is hardly the machine's fault, isn't it?

Keep in mind though, these systems use enterprise components (Xeons), yet are supported as a consumer system. While the rest of the world supports enterprise gear for 5 years (or longer at times) from the initial product release.

There's some validity here for being upset.

 

[lbodnar]

Keep in mind though, these systems use enterprise components (Xeons), yet are supported as a consumer system. While the rest of the world supports enterprise gear for 5 years (or longer at times) from the initial product release.

There are emotions, but no single logical reason:

...i will keep my macbook pro, my ipod, but a mac pro i think is a wast of money...

Ironically, MacPro1,1 was exceptional value for money at the time. And remains so.

 

[KeriJane]

Well, if you're not using a Mac Pro to do serious rendering of graphics or video it's no wonder you're disappointed.

Any Mac Pro is a poor value for Gamers, Surfers or the "gotta have the highest 3DMark score" crowd.
That's not what it was made for. It's a Workstation crammed into a Desktop suit. It wants to render large projects. Given properly configured and adequate memory and drives, it's especially good at video rendering. For its intended purpose, it was and remains a great value.

Go ahead and sell it. Put it up for auction on eBay and you'll probably be surprised at how much value remains.
Maybe someone that can actually put it to good use will pick it up and have it happily rendering away in FCP. Or messing around with massive Photoshop projects.

Please understand, I'm not trying to talk down to you. It does sound like you've bought the wrong system for your needs and you should sell it while it's still worth quite a lot. Quite a lot more than other 2006 era machines BTW, so you shouldn't take too much of a loss.


Have fun with your new system, whatever it might be,
Keri

 

[lannister80]

Wow, buying an almost-4-year-old machine means you might not be able to upgrade to the newest hardware!

Shocker!

And my PMG4 only has IDE and AGP 8x! What a rip off!

 

[zer0tails]

sorry to hear it sucks for you!

But let's set the record straight the mac pro is undoubtedly the most configurable machine in Apple's line up. And not to mention the best mac I've ever owned..switch graphics cards no problem, add more ram OK!, install four more hard drives? sure..a 5th hard drive in the optical bay? yes i could do that too!.. what more can i ask for?

 

[nanofrog]

Ironically, MacPro1,1 was exceptional value for money at the time. And remains so.

I agree. Unfortunately, the EFI32 firmware is going to be a sticking point for many. Not everyone will need to upgrade soon, but some are being forced, as they must have newer graphics cards and OS updates.

Of course, there's retasking as well, even that of a Windows 64 based workstation, which it does well. The firmware doesn't stop this. Only the exclusively K64 versions of OS X that will arrive. Graphics are already a problem under EFI, but the BIOS versions are quite happy under Windows as I understand it.

 

[Ploki]

maybe mid term, why there is so poor offer of graphic cards. I want to upgrade the graphic card to something up to date with a good price.

surely, you dont need a better gfx card for Cubase?...

 

[Inconsequential]

CPUs, memory, GPU (4870), HDs and optical drives replaceable..

Seems pretty configurable to me!

My June 2007 Macbook Pro can't run SL 64 either, it doesn't really matter...

 

[Max(IT)]

I have bought a mac pro because is highly configurable. Now i going to sell it.
this a 2006 macpro EFI32, there is no graphic cards the expansion is too limited for a machine that have cost $2000. with that price i have bought a pc and today i can reuse some parts to make a better machine. Apple just want to you keep spend a too much money in a machine that is too limited in terms of expansion. how many graphics cards you have? 3 or 4 and the new ones don't work because apple don't want.

I love mac i will keep my macbook pro, my ipod, but a mac pro i think is a wast of money for a too limited machine in short term.

Short term ?!? Dude you have a 2006 computer and we are almost into 2010!
BTW your Mac Pro still has enough power to perform almost every task ...

 

[bearcatrp]

Boot camp that sucker and add a pc graphics card to it so you can run windows when you want to game. They are expensive but as was posted earlier, these are workstation with xeons in them. You can change the processors. I did mine to an octo and ran pretty sweet. I sold it later and built one similar to a mac pro for about half the price. Only problem is I can't run OS X which I think is the best OS out there. May not be perfect but allot better than the windows headache. They both serve there purpose.

 

[CaptainChunk]

maybe mid term, why there is so poor offer of graphic cards. I want to upgrade the graphic card to something up to date with a good price.

Not that this necessarily helps, but Apple workstations have had a long history of having limited graphics card options. And aftermarket cards that drop right into a Mac tower out of the box without any hacking are rare and expensive. This is something that all high-end Apple users deal with.

But getting back to the point, Mac Pros are not ideal "power user" machines. And what I mean by "power user" is a user that wants to have complete control over every single aspect of his/her machine. I can't think of a single Apple product that was ever built with the power user in mind. The only way to get complete control is to build it yourself. Perhaps build a Hacintosh if you're that bent on having SL -and- a power user machine. But even still, you can't make just ANY graphics card work in OS X.

 

[Bubba Satori]

Be my guest and go back to the PC where you belong and have all the Windows headaches...

Touchy, touchy.
Bitter and defensive that you only have 2 low end video cards out of over 50 available to choose from for the $2,500 "upgradable" Mac?
Yeah, I'd be touchy and defensive, too, if I realized that after the Koolaid wore off.

 

[TheSpaz]

I'm kind of upset that the new graphics cards are incompatible. Seriously though... how many graphics options did this machine have? Only VERY FEW.

Let's review:

Nvidia 7300 GT
ATI Radeon X1900 XT
Nvidia Quadro FX 4500
Nvidia GeForce 8800GT

Also, you cannot count the ATI Radeon 4870 as a compatible card because although it WORKS in a first gen Mac Pro, it is not listed as a compatible component for that model. I learned a lesson from this. My ATI 4870 died a few weeks ago and although it was only 6 months old, Apple would not replace it under warranty because I was using it in a 2006 Mac Pro. So there go my chances of getting an LED display. I was fully prepared to spend the money on a new 24" LED, but I guess Apple does not want my money. So yeah, I'm pretty annoyed at the whole situation. Why can't they just say it's compatible? This is just ANOTHER artificial limitation set by Apple.

I'm pretty sick of Apple just cutting off old Macs that are still way more capable than they give them credit for. Apple COULD technically release a firmware update for these machines to give them a 64bit EFI, but they won't.

I'm happy that my computer is running faster than ever with Snow Leopard, but I sure hope that this is not the last OS update for these ancient machines. I really don't feel like spending another $2,500 on another Mac Pro. I bought the Mac Pro because I thought I'd be able to have choices in displays and graphics and it's pretty much the opposite. I can't use the newest displays and there are no graphics cards currently available that are designed for this machine.

The fact is, this machine is not obsolete to me. It's still a VERY fast machine and Snow Leopard flies on it. Why must it be obsolete to Apple?

Count me annoyed at all of this.

 

[lbodnar]

But getting back to the point, Mac Pros are not ideal "power user" machines. And what I mean by "power user" is a user that wants to have complete control over every single aspect of his/her machine.

Did you mean to say "obsessive delusional control freak" instead? Some people just need a lot of work done very quickly and reliably and this huge calculator with a fruit logo fills the shoes.

 

[jmggs]

I'm kind of upset that the new graphics cards are incompatible. Seriously though... how many graphics options did this machine have? Only VERY FEW.

Let's review:

Nvidia 7300 GT
ATI Radeon X1900 XT
Nvidia Quadro FX 4500
Nvidia GeForce 8800GT

Also, you cannot count the ATI Radeon 4870 as a compatible card because although it WORKS in a first gen Mac Pro, it is not listed as a compatible component for that model. I learned a lesson from this. My ATI 4870 died a few weeks ago and although it was only 6 months old, Apple would not replace it under warranty because I was using it in a 2006 Mac Pro. So there go my chances of getting an LED display. I was fully prepared to spend the money on a new 24" LED, but I guess Apple does not want my money. So yeah, I'm pretty annoyed at the whole situation. Why can't they just say it's compatible? This is just ANOTHER artificial limitation set by Apple.

I'm pretty sick of Apple just cutting off old Macs that are still way more capable than they give them credit for. Apple COULD technically release a firmware update for these machines to give them a 64bit EFI, but they won't.

I'm happy that my computer is running faster than ever with Snow Leopard, but I sure hope that this is not the last OS update for these ancient machines. I really don't feel like spending another $2,500 on another Mac Pro. I bought the Mac Pro because I thought I'd be able to have choices in displays and graphics and it's pretty much the opposite. I can't use the newest displays and there are no graphics cards currently available that are designed for this machine.

The fact is, this machine is not obsolete to me. It's still a VERY fast machine and Snow Leopard flies on it. Why must it be obsolete to Apple?

Count me annoyed at all of this.

this guy understands me, i just don't understand apple to sell a so expensive machine with so limited upgrade options and because artificial created limitations just to force users to buy another machine. Hey i am not rich, and no, i don't consider a 2006 a so obsolete machine. (do you guys consider a 2006 Ferrari a old car?)

I use my macpro for FCP, motion, AE, Pro Tools... and i would like to have a better graphics cards. THANK YOU APPLE FOR THE SUPPORT.

PS: I have bought this machine back in 2006 new

 

[grue]

i don't consider a 2006 a so obsolete machine. (do you guys consider a 2006 Ferrari a old car?)

Computers do not compare with cars, because cars do not advance at anything near the rate of computers.

 

[jmggs]

...i just don't understand how blind are some apple fans..

I need a better graphics card. I will spend another $2500 for a new mac. its normal for some people...accept that apple block graphics updates on pretty capable 2006 mac pro that technically can accept a decent and up to date graphics card.. i am not asking for impossible..