Mac Pro To Continue Quad-Core Tradition? Woodcrest?

[savar]

I personally would pay a small premium over the iMac for this capability.

my 2 cents....

I don't understand -- you would swap out a 20" LCD for one PCIe slot and 2 hard drive bays, and still[\i] pay a premium?

 

[sigamy]

If you take an imac, leave out the screen and have a PCI slot or two, an extra drive bay and more ram slots, then YES, it would be cheaper to build than an imac, and apple could sell it for less than an imac at the same margins. You don't think Apple could sell a basic tower for under $1699? Seriously? Are you unaware that pc makers are selling exactly that for probably half that price?

What you need to understand is that building an expandable machine is cheap and easy. Cheaper than making a laptop, a mini, or even an imac.

From a consumer standpoint, there's no reason NOT to make such a machine, consumers would love them. But a mini tower looks more like a commodity, more like a PC to apple, and they'd rather sell their more exotic machines that can get away with using design as an excuse for higher prices. I hope gaining market share beats out greed and they end up doing a mini tower.

I think chances are slim for a minitower release along with the big towers...but hopefully it will be a later addition in coming months.

Ah, the headless iMac argument yet again...good times, good times.

As much as I agree with you, the powers at Apple do not. It is not greed that makes them use design as an excuse for higher prices--it is their business model.

There are two reasons for this. First is necessity-Apple is never going to double it's market share. Never. So, how do you stay alive? You offer something unique to the smaller niche market that will pay for it. You differniate yourself from all the other PC makers who are making mini towers for half the price.

The second is that Steve Jobs still, to this day--even after everyone in the western world has used a computer and almost everyone owns a computer--Steve still feels that he knows best. He wants to make the whole widget. He doesn't want to sell you a half baked box and allow you to add things later. He is consumed by the whole package of computer/OS/software. He wants total control. Steve likes selling iMacs, notebooks and iPods because they are complete units. The whole widget. Take it out of the box and use it.

How dare you feel that you know better than Steve and feel that you need an additonal hard drive or another video card or a real time MPEG encoder.

 

[neocell]

Answer me this, what would be the point of a single woodcrest mac that doesn't outperform a single woodcrest PC, but costs vastly more?

See my other post.

Obviously I did not realize that Conroe and Woodcrest are basically the same chip. My bad.
And I have no idea of the cost difference

Note: I'm guessing you meant to say Conroe PC, if not, well that's a debate for all the 'benefits' that come with a Mac, and are absent in PCs (mostly operating system, etc.).

 

[weldon]

Plus, Apple hasn't redesigned any of their machines for the Intel transition, so I see no need to now.

iBook ----> MacBook ???

Here's what I would like to see...

CASE
2 x 5.25" drive bays for optical drives
4-6 x 3.5" drive bays
front connectors for firewire, USB2
front card reader (hidden elegantly when not in use)
IR receiver
slot for IR remote storage
quiet fans

POWER SUPPLY
modular cabling support
SATA power cables
SLI or crossfire approved

MOTHERBOARD
2 x dual-core processors
32GB RAM
4-6 SATA2 (3Gbps) ports w/ RAID 0, 1 or 5 on any/all ports
2 x PCIexpress16 slots
SLI or Crossfire approved
4+ x PCIe slots
dual gigabit ethernet
2 x eSATA (back)
3 x firewire (1 front, 2 back)
8 x USB2 (2 front, 6 back)
WiFi (b/g upgradeable to 802.11n when available)
bluetooth

 

[milo]

Why do so many people expect Apple to dell the Mac Proo? Just because other companies sell a lousy little desktop that is less powerful than the iMac in the same price range doesn't mean Apple has to. I hope they don't trash the PowerMac moniker with second class machines haha

Are you talking about a mini tower? What would be "lousy" or "less powerful" about it? Nobody is asking for a machine that is less powerful than the imac, just one that is headless and expandable.

We're just talking about a machine that is smaller, has fewer slots and drive bays, and maybe not all the high end features. For example, same features and specs as an imac, remove the screen, add a couple pci slots, memory slots, and one drive bay.

I don't see how that would be "lousy"...unless you already consider the imac lousy?

Ah, the headless iMac argument yet again...good times, good times.

As much as I agree with you, the powers at Apple do not. It is not greed that makes them use design as an excuse for higher prices--it is their business model.

There are two reasons for this. First is necessity-Apple is never going to double it's market share. Never. So, how do you stay alive? You offer something unique to the smaller niche market that will pay for it. You differniate yourself from all the other PC makers who are making mini towers for half the price.

The second is that Steve Jobs still, to this day--even after everyone in the western world has used a computer and almost everyone owns a computer--Steve still feels that he knows best. He wants to make the whole widget. He doesn't want to sell you a half baked box and allow you to add things later. He is consumed by the whole package of computer/OS/software. He wants total control. Steve likes selling iMacs, notebooks and iPods because they are complete units. The whole widget. Take it out of the box and use it.

How dare you feel that you know better than Steve and feel that you need an additonal hard drive or another video card or a real time MPEG encoder.

I don't agree that it's impossible for apple to double their marketshare. In fact, I think adding a model like a midtower is something that would help. Delivering niche products is great, and works well for apple, to a degree. But if that's all they do, they're giving up. They're avoiding the possibility of increasing their marketshare.

As for the all-in-one widget, apple is already shipping exceptions to this. If this was their whole philosophy, then why wouldn't they just stop selling towers at all? And why are they shipping the mini (which people insisted would NEVER happen...in posts very similar to yours)?

So far, Apple has decided not to do this. But there's no reason they couldn't change their mind. After all, they already broke their own "rule" already by releasing the mini. And circumstances have changed as well, the cost of releasing an additional model is much less on intel hardware.

 

[BlizzardBomb]

Or perhaps they will introduce a "Mac" and a "MacPro", with the "Mac" being a Conroe mini-tower and the "MacPro" being a Woodcrest beast.

"Hey, I bought a Mac today!"
"Cool, which one?"
"A Mac."
"Yeah, which one?"
"The Mac Mac"
"Huh?"

Concept is great, the name won't work though

Hopefully the new Mac Pro will be sleeker, but with the same design like they did with PB -> MBP. Sleeker, brighter, cheaper ACD's with a revised pixel policy (say 2 dead pixels or 3 stuck = return) would be a bonus too.

 

[TangoCharlie]

Woodcrest CPU....

At least it will be fast

Are these intel chips 64bit or is that something that will just kind of fade away?

Yes, Merom (Core 2 Duo), Conroe (Core 2 extreme) and Woodcrest (Xeon ???!!!)
all support EM64T (a.k.a. iAMD64 !!).

I have long suspected that Apple will put Woodcrest into XServe and Mac Pro systems, and upgrade the iMac to Merom or even Conroe.

I still maintain, that there is room for a "Business Mac" in a smaller and sleeker enclosure than the current G5 beast. It would be Conroe based.

More StinkSecret-like guestimation: Apple will upgrade the MBP to Merom shortly after it is released... in the 17" MBP at least!

OTOH, I can't see a space in the Mac lineup for an "eMac". Any new all-in-one would have to have a TFT display, and so any "eMac" would be too close to the current iMac configuration....

Just my 2 euro cents!

ttfn

Tim.

 

[Multimedia]

"we're kinda done with 'power', so let me introduce the InsaneMac! 4 quad core processors".........drools

Or Two 8 Core. It'll happen sooner than we can imagine. Plus 4 cores inside MacBook Pro by the end of next year.

Here's the Intel Roadmap for those here who need to catch up. All these different names can be confusing. The 8 Core premiere will probably be a Yorkfield next summer at the WWDC '07. Four Tigertons will give us 16. But that might not be until '08.

What is the price difference between the two chips?
Would intel really make a chip that was exactly the same except for the above mention difference?
I really don't know. If this really is true, it seems very silly. All the effort of making two chips, testing, marketing etc. and the only difference is one can play nicely together and the other can't? That seems like a waste of money to me.

Obviously I did not realize that Conroe and Woodcrest are basically the same chip. My bad.
And I have no idea of the cost difference.

You know neo, we've been discussing this in depth for at least two months on other threads. Woodies are mainly for servers and incedentally for high end multi-socket workstations. Conroes are for single socket mainstream PCs. Conroes run cooler and, for the most part, at slower speeds. I am sure if you study the 2322 posts that have already been made by AidenShaw, all will become perfectly clear to you.

In a nutshell, the Dual Woddies are a stopgap way to keep a Quad in the lineup until Quad Core Kentsfields (part of the Conroe Family) can be brought in early next year. Woodie Tulsas will be the first way to have 8 cores inside.

 

[boncellis]

The fact that you compare the iMac and Mac Pro shows that you don't get it.

There's no "between" the iMac and the tower, they are two different models. Might as well talk about a model between the macbook and tower.

The slot for the mini tower is to fill the big gap between the mini and the tower, currently $1200.

The iMac is great for a certain market, but not an option for other users. Some people want some degree of expandability and upgradability for a reasonable price. There's no reason apple couldn't release a mini tower that costs LESS than the pricier iMacs. There's a big reason for apple to do it - there are consumers that want it and would buy it. However, it would probably take away some sales from other products, so they probably won't do it.

I think Milo explained it accurately, though there is something to be said for Apple not wanting to do it either whether it is design and production cost or not enough demand in their mind.

What about this, instead: a redesign for the Mac Mini with a larger case, option for a dedicated graphics card, and 3.5" HDDs. Keep the same specs that are in there now (except with Merom replacing Yonah), IIG 965 in the low end, x1300 or x1600 in the high end and an optional 250 GD HDD. Even if the case size doubles I think it would still be plenty small. Then you could have the $599, $799 and $1099 pricepoints (or thereabout) with the high end "Mini" catering to those of us who really want something between the PowerMac and the Mini.

 

[aswitcher]

Apple could easily come out with a single processor desktop in the $999-$1599 price range that would be very popular. Two hard drive bays, a upgradeable video card, and a few spare PCIE slots around a Conroe.

Works for me

 

[milo]

What about this, instead: a redesign for the Mac Mini with a larger case, option for a dedicated graphics card, and 3.5" HDDs. Keep the same specs that are in there now (except with Merom replacing Yonah), IIG 965 in the low end, x1300 or x1600 in the high end and an optional 250 GD HDD. Even if the case size doubles I think it would still be plenty small. Then you could have the $599, $799 and $1099 pricepoints (or thereabout) with the high end "Mini" catering to those of us who really want something between the PowerMac and the Mini.

I think you're on the right track. But I'm thinking about a model in addition to the mini instead of replacing it, and make it a pizza box enclosure. Perfect for media center use as well as an all around solid mid range computer.

I think apple dropped the ball on the mini by making it so small. They should have gone slightly bigger and used desktop hard drive and optical, it would have allowed for much bigger drives and saved a ton of money. Unfortunately I don't think we'll see the mini replaced by anything much bigger because it would be viewed as a step backward for apple.

 

[Makosuke]

All the new Macs with Intel so far have had reports that they are hotter than their PPC ancestors. My MacBook runs a hell of a lot hotter than my iBook ever did.

No, the laptops run a lot hotter because they're a lot faster. The Intel iMac, from everything I've heard, is cooler than the old design because of the Core vs. G5. Isn't it even thinner than the old one, or did that happen with the last-gen G5 iMacs?

Anyway, I'd say they've just GOT to go with Woodcrest. The fact is, they've set the current G5 towers up as absolute beast workstations, and a single dual-core Conroe at the high end would be a significant step down. Woodcrest should be able to best the G5 in most operations based on early benchmarks, so that really makes it the only viable replacement.

I do agree that splitting the line into "Mac" and "Mac Pro" or whatever would be a neat thing to do, though I'm not sure they will--they might just have identical-looking but notably crappier Mac Pros at the low end. There's certainly precident for this--some G5 tower models basically used an iMac motherboard, while the higher-end ones were far more full-featured (more RAM capacity, etc).

 

[Glen Quagmire]

I'd like to see:

Single Conroe on the low-end model.
Dual Woodcrests on the intermediate and high-level model.

All models:

Two optical bays
Four hard drive bays.
SATA-2 - six connectors including one external one.
RAID 0/1/5/10.
8 USB 2 ports - two on on the front of the case.
1 FW400, 1 FW800 - on the back
5.1 sound with optical out.
DVD +/- RW (SATA).
Plenty of slots for memory.
New case. I don't particularly like the old one. Get rid of the speed holes and make it smaller.
Infra-red.
Wireless ("B" and "G").
Bluetooth.
Two PCIe x16 slots, for running SLI.
One PCIe x4 slot, for network cards, RAID cards and the like.
One PCI slot (for old time's sake).
Dual Gbit Ethernet.
*Very* quiet fans.
Optional black finish (a la Macbook).

 

[NYmacAttack]

I think you're on the right track. But I'm thinking about a model in addition to the mini instead of replacing it, and make it a pizza box enclosure. Perfect for media center use as well as an all around solid mid range computer.

I think apple dropped the ball on the mini by making it so small. They should have gone slightly bigger and used desktop hard drive and optical, it would have allowed for much bigger drives and saved a ton of money. Unfortunately I don't think we'll see the mini replaced by anything much bigger because it would be viewed as a step backward for apple.

It would be interesting to see if apple ever goes this route. They seem to try to stay away from a true media center machine.

 

[BlizzardBomb]

I'd like to see:

Single Conroe on the low-end model.
Dual Woodcrests on the intermediate and high-level model.

Dual Woodcrests on intermediate? Well if you want to spend $4000 at intermediate that's fine by me.

 

[BenRoethig]

You're kidding right?[/URL]?

Compared to similarly PC workstations, they have half as many optical drive bays, hard drive bays, expansion slots, and ports. I know people who bought a windows workstation because they would have needed two G5s to do the same job because of lack of expansion.

 

[Bregalad]

Several points

The iMac is a laptop on a stand. It's highly unlikely we'll see one with a Conroe. Remember Steve hates fan noise and the iMac would need upgraded (louder) cooling to handle a Conroe.

Whether Steve likes it or not kids have an enormous say in which computer mom or dad buys. I worked in Mac retail in the mid 90's and then again in the G5 days. What I saw in the store was not what Apple could possibly have wanted. Often when a family with kids over the age of 6 came in, the parents were shopping for themselves. The majority of iMac G5 buyers had an iMac G3 that the kids had abandoned within months of it being brand new. Their endless whining about not being able to play the games their friends had led to the purchase of one or more PCs.

Apple has tried to address the no games problem with the move to Intel, but they still don't get it. Mom and dad honestly believe the Mac will last 5 years. The kids, however, know that the video card in that iMac isn't good enough for today's most demanding games and will be next to useless within 18 months. Therefore the kids will continue to demand XBox 360s and/or new PCs so they can play multiplayer games with their friends.

It isn't only kids Apple has a problem with. Advertisers have realized that 18-34 year old males don't watch much TV these days because they'd rather play games on their computers. This demographic is very knowledgeable and have the highest PC ownership of any group, driven mainly by multiplayer games.

I propose Apple go after some of these people and fill the gaping $1099 hole between the high end iMac and low end PowerMac (with equal 20" screen) with a larger version of the Mac mini. It would contain a Conroe, a 3.5" HD, upgradeable video card and (to stop the inevitable whining) a single PCI-e slot. Price it so the total cost (with 20" Cinema) falls midway between the iMac and MacPro.

The current PowerMac is an embarrasing joke. The Quad can't even run Aperture without a video card upgrade. It certainly isn't worthy of the term Pro when it can only hold two HDs. I sure hope the MacPro fixes those problems.

 

[milo]

It would be interesting to see if apple ever goes this route. They seem to try to stay away from a true media center machine.

True. If they did it, they would likely ship a machine that would be a good media center...but not really admit to it.

They've done that on the latest minis by adding digital audio out, they are much better than the last generation for media, but apple isn't promoting them much for that use.

The Quad can't even run Aperture without a video card upgrade.

Really? You have a link on that? I find that hard to believe, especially since people have reported running it on macbooks and minis. On the other hand, Aperture does tend to run horribly, but that seems like the app's fault since it runs poorly on virtually every machine.

I agree with you on the drive bays, but for performance the G5 has been pretty incredible for me.

 

[boncellis]

I think you're on the right track. But I'm thinking about a model in addition to the mini instead of replacing it, and make it a pizza box enclosure. Perfect for media center use as well as an all around solid mid range computer.

I think apple dropped the ball on the mini by making it so small. They should have gone slightly bigger and used desktop hard drive and optical, it would have allowed for much bigger drives and saved a ton of money. Unfortunately I don't think we'll see the mini replaced by anything much bigger because it would be viewed as a step backward for apple.

Right, I know what you mean. And you're right about Apple probably not replacing or changing the form factor of the Mini for the reasons you mention, it's a shame though.

The mid-range enclosure would work well for a media center, if for nothing else than the dedicated graphics. I know the 965 is supposed to be pretty good, but why just be good when it could be much better--especially for something hooked up to a 1080p set.

What you described is something I would jump on.

 

[BenRoethig]

Excellent, I'm already saving up!

Good: Dual-Core Conroe
Better: Dual-Core Conroe (faster)
Best: 2x Dual-Core Woodcrest (insane)

Specs like that in the pro arena are going to make Dell very happy. They need to be all woodcrest. Conroe is a consumer desktop chip.

 

[jelloshotsrule]

Dual Woodcrests on intermediate? Well if you want to spend $4000 at intermediate that's fine by me.

so you think that the high end mac pro will be 4k (ie, assuming 2 models with a single conroe, high end with dual woodcrests)? that seems unlikely...

 

[neocell]

You know neo, we've been discussing this in depth for at least two months on other threads. Woodies are mainly for servers and incedentally for high end multi-socket workstations. Conroes are for single socket mainstream PCs. Conroes run cooler and, for the most part, at slower speeds. I am sure if you study the 2322 posts that have already been made by AidenShaw, all will become perfectly clear to you.

In a nutshell, the Dual Woddies are a stopgap way to keep a Quad in the lineup until Quad Core Kentsfields (part of the Conroe Family) can be brought in early next year. Woodie Tulsas will be the first way to have 8 cores inside.

As is obviously apparent, I do not read the hardware forums/threads. Even so in my mind it is a backwards step if you transition from a dual CPU configuration to a single CPU config, no matter how many cores you have. Why would apple want to do that? Obviously they did to some extent with the dual core G5s but to me, it would be silly for apple to go to single CPU Pro computers with the quad core Conroe. Why settle for four when you could have eight? Why settle for eight when you can have 16 etc.
That's just me.

 

[milo]

Specs like that in the pro arena are going to make Dell very happy. They need to be all woodcrest. Conroe is a consumer desktop chip.

That makes no sense. If they're all woodcrest, then prices will increase especially on the base model. Meaning that apple wouldn't have a tower under 3k probably? Now THAT would make dell happy.

A line with a range of prices and performances seems to be most competitive with dell. If dell is shipping those three configurations (which they will), how can you be competitive by offering LESS configurations, especially with nothing on the low end?

Or do you expect Dell to ship a config better than quad cores of woodcrest?

And I hate to break this to you, but the low end "pro" tower IS a consumer desktop machine. And I don't really mind that, I'd just like to see a configuration that allows a price drop on that model (assuming we don't see a cheaper mini tower).

 

[Multimedia]

This Makes No Sense Whatsoever

As is obviously apparent, I do not read the hardware forums/threads. Even so in my mind it is a backwards step if you transition from a dual CPU configuration to a single CPU config, no matter how many cores you have. Why would apple want to do that? Obviously they did to some extent with the dual core G5s but to me, it would be silly for apple to go to single CPU Pro computers with the quad core Conroe. Why settle for four when you could have eight? Why settle for eight when you can have 16 etc.
That's just me.

Did you read what you wrote before pressing the Submit button? I have no idea what you mean.

 

[Legacy]

At the price theyre selling those beasts, they should have only the cheapest ($1999) model with the fastest Conroe chip and the other two (2499/3299) with Quad Woodcrests. Its a PowerMac, its supposed to be the fastest Mac and probably the fastest personal computer. People are willing to fork out so much for it, they should get the best.