Mac Pro To Get Dual Optical Drive Slots?

[Timepass]

I disagree. Using ATX power supplies is a stupid idea. I am sure Apple uses higher quality power supplies than you would pick up at your local CompUSA.

If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.

Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.

This would cause too many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.

Well I wouldnt worry about that in the case of a mac. Only people who are really going to replace there PSU are going to be people who know something about computers. A lot of people replace there ram. PSU are not upgraded very offen if ever at all.

Also the people who do replace PSU most of them know dont cheap out on them. Among home builder comminty a thing most agree on is NEVER cheap out on a PSU. Go name brand. Reason being is why would you build a 1k system and then risk it all with a cheap PSU (rule can be cut if pretty much using dirt cheap parts to begin with and trying to go as cheaply as possible (less than 500 and in old spare parts). My own PC rig using an Antec True Power PSU in it (that i pick up from compUSA oddly enough).

I think going ATX is a good thing because it means Apple is going to be using more standardized parts so it will be cheaper for apple to get them.

 

[~Shard~]

Well I wouldnt worry about that in the case of a mac. Only people who are really going to replace there PSU are going to be people who know something about computers. A lot of people replace there ram. PSU are not upgraded very offen if ever at all.

Also the people who do replace PSU most of them know dont cheap out on them. Among home builder comminty a thing most agree on is NEVER cheap out on a PSU. Go name brand. Reason being is why would you build a 1k system and then risk it all with a cheap PSU (rule can be cut if pretty much using dirt cheap parts to begin with and trying to go as cheaply as possible (less than 500 and in old spare parts). My own PC rig using an Antec True Power PSU in it (that i pick up from compUSA oddly enough).

I think going ATX is a good thing because it means Apple is going to be using more standardized parts so it will be cheaper for apple to get them.

And another good point! Yeah, you would hope that if someone is replacing their PSU they know what they're doing... it is different from a Joe User simply installing some RAM.

 

[cgc]

well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise..

I think placing the PSU at the bottom of the case is good...heavy items near the top of the case may lead to Macs being prone to tipping over. Heat can be vented easy enough...

 

[Timepass]

I think placing the PSU at the bottom of the case is good...heavy items near the top of the case may lead to Macs being prone to tipping over. Heat can be vented easy enough...

Come on PSU do are not that heavy and genenally speaking cases are pretty stable. Putting the PSU at the top, oh dang the computer will tip over with 1 inch of less travel. It a Tower that going to be out of the way and not hit that offen. Come on PC have been built for years with PSU at the top. Are they unstable... No they are fairly stable. Considering 95+% of all PC towers out there have the PSU at the top and are they tipping over at a slight hit.. No. you have to tip them pretty far before they will fall over.

Also there are other advatages of putting the PSU at the top. Instead of having to make another fan system to cool it and keep it separated from the rest of the case due to the heat it generatates you can now put it at the top where it not going to add heat to the case and use the PSU fans to help cool the rest of the computer.

Lets see that means less fans are needed over all in the computer which means Oh my gosh. LESS NOISE. <sarcasim>Is that possible. Using a PSU fans to help cool the entire computer...... Who as ever heard of such a thing. <sarcasim> Really people most of the agurments people are using against putting the PSU at the top are stupid and weak at best.

It WILL NOT make the computer top heavy. The base on computer is wide enough to keep it stable any how.

It WILL NOT add any more noise to the computer (it will reduce it because the PSU can now help cool the case with it own cooling fans as well)

Power plug at the top.. Um yeah not really a problem. Oh dang a wire is not 12 in higher than it was before. it is still on the back. and instead of plugging in you monitor at the top of the case and the plug on the bottom they flip locations. You the user will never notices or care.

 

[guzhogi]

Something I liked about the power supply in my beige G3 was that not only did it have a power in socket, but allso a power out one too to a monitor or something.

 

[wizz0bang]

I like your line of thinking. You know, what if Apple just released 4 Mac Pro models? Or offered 2 Mac Pro models and 2 iMac Pro models. The bottom two could have Conroe chips and the top two could have 2 x Woodcrest chips. Perhaps have an ever so slight case design difference between the two (i.e. slightly smaller on the low end or charcoal black on the upper end). Because, when you think of it, "prosumers" who already own a display are faced with a difficult buying decision with the current lineup.

That would be a good lineup: two Minis, two iMacs, two Macs, two MacPros. Perhaps then the spread from $1499 for a base model conroe Mac to a $3299 or even $3599 for a premo dual-woodcrest 3GHz MacPro would seem plausible? I really like having a Mac desktop option before stepping up to the MacPro (with a smaller format). Right now the iMac is your only option in a certain range.

I agree with another poster too, having both models silent would be most excellent!

 

[bigjohn]

Really, Apple has always been truly at the back of the back when it comes to optical drives. My money says that if there are two optical drive - one is a CD-R and one is a DVD-RAM.

Also, 1GB of RAM, who are they kidding? More like Mac Amateur

 

[cgmpowers]

Two Optical Drives & Random Thoughts

Has anyone considered this as to why Apple 'maybe' including two optical drives? We have external lightscribe 'superdrives' from Lacie (and others) but haven't seen one by Apple yet. That'd be a nice feature. So that's the first drive. The second optical drive is probably that BlueRay drive (massive storage capability compared to the other optical drive, and probably NOT capable of Lightscribing).

Other thoughts, I do agree it'd be nice to have four bays for hard drives but hard drive sizes are increasing again. I'd be very happy with two 500 or 600 gb hard drives (which is what I'll be ordering).

1 GB of ram min. is a must, I'm opting for at least 4 GB.

I also don't care if its 2.66 Ghz or 3.00 Ghz as long as its a quad (two dual core).. I just need an Intel MacPro soon.. My G4 1ghz machines are SO MUCH showing its age..

 

[gekko513]

Also, 1GB of RAM, who are they kidding? More like Mac Amateur

Many prefer to buy their own RAM because it's usually cheaper. There would be more people crying if Apple bundled 2GB of expensive RAM. They could offer a RAM downgrade of course, but then why not just give the price of the downgraded version, which leaves us at square one again.

 

[jiggie2g]

MacPro is really starting to become a Joke.

The only reason I see Apple going all Woodcrest is to justify their high markups , while insulting you Mac Loyalist on price they also offer you less performance for your money.

Look here at the current woody pricing at Newegg

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...&description=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=

So apple is going to charge you guys $1799 for a Desktop with a 2.0ghz CPU , when everyone else will charge $1199 for a Conroe E6600 2.4ghz based desktop.

This is not looking good apple.

 

[gekko513]

The only reason I see Apple going all Woodcrest is to justify their high markups , while insulting you Mac Loyalist on price they also offer you less performance for your money.

Look here at the current woody pricing at Newegg

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...&description=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=

So apple is going to charge you guys $1799 for a Desktop with a 2.0ghz CPU , when everyone else will charge $1199 for a Conroe E6600 2.4ghz based desktop.

This is not looking good apple.

There's a good point here, but it's not the one you're pointing at. If Apple continues as they have with the PowerMac pricing, the Mac Pro will not be an insult if you compare it to Dells, HP and other vendors' pro offerings. Historically they have all been at very comparable price levels for comparable products. There are other differences between the lines than GHz. Quality standards for the pro/expensive lines are higher than for the consumer line, for one thing.

The point is that Apple doesn't have an option for potential buyers that want a high performance, customisable and upgradable consumer level product (not all-in-one). There are no Apple product to compare those $1199 Conroe PCs to. The closest thing is the iMac.

 

[50548]

That would be a good lineup: two Minis, two iMacs, two Macs, two MacPros. Perhaps then the spread from $1499 for a base model conroe Mac to a $3299 or even $3599 for a premo dual-woodcrest 3GHz MacPro would seem plausible? I really like having a Mac desktop option before stepping up to the MacPro (with a smaller format). Right now the iMac is your only option in a certain range.

I agree with another poster too, having both models silent would be most excellent!

This sounds to me like a redux of the Performa/Quadra/LC disaster of the late 90s...I am glad Apple has learned from its mistakes, so it does NOT stretch its production line to a plethora of unnecessary models anymore...

A cheapo MacPro model is more than enough to fill any gaps between the iMac and the Pro line...nothing else.

 

[~Shard~]

The point is that Apple doesn't have an option for potential buyers that want a high performance, customisable and upgradable consumer level product (not all-in-one). There are no Apple product to compare those $1199 Conroe PCs to. The closest thing is the iMac.

Exactly. As I said above, a PowerMac is overkill (on both price and power) for many users. The iMac might suit their needs from this perspective, however many people do not like the fact that they are not upgradeable (apart from the RAM). What if I want a larger HDD in my iMac? What if I want two HDDs? What if I want to swap in a new burner? What if the HDD fails? It would be nice to pop a new one in, not have to buy a whole new machine. And then there's the display. If the HDD goes, as in my example above, how many people would like to throw away that nice 20" display which still works perfectly? Or, vice versa, what if the display goes? The rest of the computer is perfectly fine...

A Conroe mini-tower would be perfect for many people. The gap between Mac mini/iMac and PowerMac is simply too large for many people.

 

[JGowan]

Man if they put the power supply on the top that would just be insanely stupid.-mark

That's just some guy's rendition who knows a little about Adobe software. Certainly not Jonathan Ive's work, nor will remotely look like that.

 

[Anonymous Freak]

Can anyone tell me the purpose of dual drive slots nowadays? I can see the use for them (and had computers with) when they were limited to one function, i.e. DVD-ROM for one and a CD-RW for the other but now that everything can happen in one drive with speed not being an issue, is it really nececcary to have two?

Early Blu-Ray burners can't read or write CDs, and are slow at DVDs. Maybe we'll see a Blu-Ray burner and a high-speed DVD±R(W)/CD-R(W).

 

[^squirrel^]

Good: Dual-Core 2GHz Intel Xeon, 512MB DDR 667, ATI Radeon X1600 Pro, 250GB Hard Drive,$1799
Better: Dual-Core 2.33GHz Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $2499
Best: Two Dual-Core 2.66 Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $3299

I wonder if i'll be able to upgrade to the X1900?

 

[Anonymous Freak]

2.66 GHz at the top?

You mean like how the MacBook Pro was 2.0 GHz at the top end on release?

I have a feeling if 2.66 is the top-end 'stock' model, it will be upgradeable to 3.0 GHz as a user-configurable option, much the way the MacBook Pro was at 2.0 GHz upgradeable to 2.16 GHz.

With SPEC benchmarks showing The 3.0 GHz Woodcrest as the absolute fastest processor on the market for both floating point and integer (it has a 50% lead over the second-place integer chip!) it's a good bet Apple will offer it, at least as an option.

I'm actually truly excited about a processor launch. The last time was the G5 intro. (Before that, it was the original PowerPC introduction.)

 

[[G5]Hydra]

Early Blu-Ray burners can't read or write CDs, and are slow at DVDs. Maybe we'll see a Blu-Ray burner and a high-speed DVD±R(W)/CD-R(W).

Exactly right. Apple seems cozy with Pioneer, they did debut the original Superdrive in a PowerMac remember, and Pioneer's BDR-101A Blu-ray burner can't read or write CDs. Dual opticals would have nothing to do with Apple wanting to make people copy discs or doing anything made simple with two opticals. Pioneer debuted the BDR-101A a few months ago at $1000 retail and if Apple gets a nice discount to use them they would need to go with an additional drive to be able to do CD's.

-Jerry C.

 

[Silentwave]

The only reason I see Apple going all Woodcrest is to justify their high markups , while insulting you Mac Loyalist on price they also offer you less performance for your money.

Look here at the current woody pricing at Newegg

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...&description=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=

So apple is going to charge you guys $1799 for a Desktop with a 2.0ghz CPU , when everyone else will charge $1199 for a Conroe E6600 2.4ghz based desktop.

This is not looking good apple.

You can be quiet now. Go on Dell's medium/large business site, which is the *only* section you can find the Woodcrests in single/dual configs (HP doesn't have theirs out yet), and configure one with a decent video card, 250GB HD, no monitor, and any of the rumored processor configurations (which I think some are not correct), a DL DVD+/-RW burner, and optical mouse and you tell ME how much it costs.

 

[kevin.rivers]

You can be quiet now. Go on Dell's medium/large business site, which is the *only* section you can find the Woodcrests in single/dual configs (HP doesn't have theirs out yet), and configure one with a decent video card, 250GB HD, no monitor, and any of the rumored processor configurations (which I think some are not correct), a DL DVD+/-RW burner, and optical mouse and you tell ME how much it costs.

I will tell you how much... Very Expensive.

I must say it boils my blood to read some of the ignorant posts on here. Give me the top parts in a small box, all for $999.

Jiggie2g, your assumptions are way off. I configured the Dell Silentwave mentioned with:

One 5130
1GB DDR2 667
250GB HD
DVD+/-RW burner

price: $2983

Far from $1199. Oh but wait, you pulled a good move. Talking about woodcrest systems and giving a theoretical pricing for a Conroe system. Nice move.

Anyway. Us loyalist Mac buyers are fully aware of current pricing and when price and specs are announced we will make a decision to buy or not to buy. I doubt Apple insults us. Maybe you, even when the data puts the pricing in the same spectrum, you will buy Dell anyway to make yourself feel good. Cheers.

 

[sonnys]

Too many people are complaining about rumored information that isn't even reliable, and most likely incorrect.

I think we can look at what Apple has done with its other lineups this past year as a guide to the future. Based on what we've seen, I don't think Apple will be redesigning the Mac Pro case -- it's large enough to accommodate anything they wish to throw in there. I also think it's a great industrial design, physically alluding to the power within.

The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?

Great new technologies always made their way to the Power Macs first, and then trickled down the line. I have every faith that the Mac Pro will continue this tradition, especially since the Mac Pro will be competing with other high-end Xeon workstations. Apple will need something in the Mac Pro that nobody else has, and it will also need to utilize Intel's fastest chips in order to dispel any notions of the system being weaker than the competition in terms of speed -- this is a dark cloud over the Mac that finally needs to be cleared.

Having two optical drives makes sense if one of the drives is going to be BluRay -- isn't BluRay incompatible with writing DVD and HD-DVD content? It would make sense if one of the drives was BluRay, the other was HD-DVD, giving Mac Pro users access to the full spectrum of DVD authoring hardware. If two optical bays are provided, I believe this type of configuration will be offered.

I'll be watching the announcement closely, although my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 (single core) handles everything I throw at it and has never ever given me reason to even want to upgrade. However, if the new Mac Pro hits 3 GHz I may be very tempted... if it doesn't, I'll wait it out. If the new high end Mac Pro doesn't go to 3 GHz like Dell and others, the Mac Pro will sink plenty fast.

 

[Multimedia]

We're All Grasping At Straws Aren't We?

Too many people are complaining about rumored information that isn't even reliable, and most likely incorrect.

I think we can look at what Apple has done with its other lineups this past year as a guide to the future. Based on what we've seen, I don't think Apple will be redesigning the Mac Pro case -- it's large enough to accommodate anything they wish to throw in there. I also think it's a great industrial design, physically alluding to the power within.

The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?

I'll be watching the announcement closely, although my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 (single core) handles everything I throw at it and has never ever given me reason to even want to upgrade. However, if the new Mac Pro hits 3 GHz I may be very tempted... if it doesn't, I'll wait it out. If the new high end Mac Pro doesn't go to 3 GHz like Dell and others, the Mac Pro will sink plenty fast.

Well my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 was easily brought to it's knees once I started simultaneously recording EyeTV, Encoding DVD Images and Ripping MP4s from those Images. Thank GOD the Quad went refurb in early February and I was able to sell your model for $2500.

In any event, I think we are all grasping at straws for the next three weeks waiting for Monday morning August 7. I'm sure there will be some sort of surprise. But I have no idea what that surprise will be. I'll be glad when it's over since we'll all be able to see much more clearly how the next year will be looking.

 

[cgc]

...Putting the PSU at the top, oh dang the computer will tip over with 1 inch of less travel...

...Really people most of the agurments people are using against putting the PSU at the top are stupid and weak at best...

...It WILL NOT make the computer top heavy. The base on computer is wide enough to keep it stable any how...

I was not arguing for or against PSUs at top or bottom, I was simply trying to throw one simple point out: that a 300W PSU which weighs between 2 and 4 lbs would bring the top weight up slightly. I'm not saying it will make Macs tip. I'm sure Apple has considered distributing the weight to ensure their towers are stable, especially since they have one of the largest towers on the market in the G5.

BTW, no need to be so sarcastic and have such a bad attitude.

 

[Silentwave]

Too many people are complaining about rumored information that isn't even reliable, and most likely incorrect.

I agree with you whole-heartedly!

The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?

Great new technologies always made their way to the Power Macs first, and then trickled down the line. I have every faith that the Mac Pro will continue this tradition, especially since the Mac Pro will be competing with other high-end Xeon workstations. Apple will need something in the Mac Pro that nobody else has, and it will also need to utilize Intel's fastest chips in order to dispel any notions of the system being weaker than the competition in terms of speed -- this is a dark cloud over the Mac that finally needs to be cleared.

You hit the nail right on the head with the processor availability. Core Duo uses the pentium M architecture and was only in two versions: mobile, codename Yonah with its variants, and a pair of low speed ultra low power server chips- Sossaman- only going up to 2GHz with 2MB L2 and 667 FSB. the other Xeons (Paxville/Dempsey) and high end chips like the Pentium D/Pentium Extreme Edition ( Smithfield/Presler) are all using NetBurst architecutre, which is obsolete and very inefficient plus they are extremely power hungry and hot.The top Pentium Extreme Edition Presler dual core at 3.73GHz was easily outperformed by several of the Conroe cores- I recall one test where it was neck and neck with the 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo.

They wanted the fastest chips possible using the best architecture possible- that is Woodcrest and Conroe with the Core microarchitecture.

I have little doubt that the 3GHz Xeon 5160 will be in the Mac Pros, if not standard, then as a BTO option.

 

[Squire]

The gap between Mac mini/iMac and PowerMac is simply too large for many people.

You could even take it a step further and say that the gap between the Mac mini and the (rumored) Mac Pro is too large. Why exclude the iMac? Well, for the consumer with a nice 20" LCD on his/her desk, the iMac is simply not an option.

Give us a Conroe-based tower, please. They could even keep the same basic case design across the board. Call the upper end ones "Mac Pro Extreme" or something. (I like the idea of offering a black anodized aluminum case to differentiate between Conroe- and Woodcrest-based systems.)

-Squire