Mac Pro To Get Dual Optical Drive Slots?

[~Shard~]

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.

Quite true Squire - the iMac may not even be an option for many people who already have a nice 20" (or whatever) LCD display. Buying an iMac would be silly, as why would they want another screen?

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.)

Good idea, I like it. I would be fine with that type of aesthetic differentiation.

 

[Squire]

Good idea, I like it. I would be fine with that type of aesthetic differentiation.

Great. I guess there's nothing left to discuss, then. I'll call Steve and make it happen.


-Squire

 

[Multimedia]

Spanning Is Quite Helpful

Quite true Squire - the iMac may not even be an option for many people who already have a nice 20" (or whatever) LCD display. Buying an iMac would be silly, as why would they want another screen?

So they can span across two. I couldn't function with only one screen. Once you get used to two or more screens, you never want to go back to only one.

 

[Squire]

So they can span across two. I couldn't function with only one screen. Once you get used to two or more screens, you never want to go back to only one.

Now that's a bit of a stretch, isn't it? I think, in general, most potential iMac buyers would see 2 monitors as an unnecessary luxury. (I see you're "limping along" with a quad G5.)

(That said, I wish I had 2 monitors.)

-Squire

 

[it5five]

All this talk again about the supposed mid-range line I see. QCassidy352 had a good point earlier, which might have been overlooked by some of your:

I doubt they'll do it too. For some reason this idea has come up over and over again during the last few weeks, and I'll continue to say what I've been saying - I don't see why apple would do that. It's a very appealing idea for a lot of MR folks because a lot of us are knowledgable users but not really professionals. But beyond that group, which is prevalent at MR but fairly rare in the real world, I don't see the appeal.

Also, think about what apple would be doing with such a machine - selling you a low cost, low margin mac that you could nonetheless upgrade with 3rd party components for years. Meaning that apple doesn't make a lot off you up front and doesn't get you coming back again for 5-ish years. Great for you, not so great for them. Whereas if they sell you a mac pro, they make a killing up front, so it's ok if you keep it for years, and if they sell you anything else you'll be back a lot sooner.

 

[Squire]

All this talk again about the supposed mid-range line I see. QCassidy352 had a good point earlier, which might have been overlooked by some of your:

I doubt they'll do it too. For some reason this idea has come up over and over again during the last few weeks, and I'll continue to say what I've been saying - I don't see why apple would do that. It's a very appealing idea for a lot of MR folks because a lot of us are knowledgable users but not really professionals. But beyond that group, which is prevalent at MR but fairly rare in the real world, I don't see the appeal.

Also, think about what apple would be doing with such a machine - selling you a low cost, low margin mac that you could nonetheless upgrade with 3rd party components for years. Meaning that apple doesn't make a lot off you up front and doesn't get you coming back again for 5-ish years. Great for you, not so great for them. Whereas if they sell you a mac pro, they make a killing up front, so it's ok if you keep it for years, and if they sell you anything else you'll be back a lot sooner.

Good points. However, if Apple wants to compete with PC manufacturers-- and, for the sake of argument, let's assume they do-- they will have to offer something like the mid-range tower I and many others long for.

* Mac mini = chance to "get one's feet wet" in the Mac world without investing a fortune.
* iMac = want power and simplicity in an elegant package; don't own a monitor.

<insert new tower here>

* Mac Pro = for people who earn a living working with the machine or for prosumers with some disposable income.

-Squire

<edit> Remember: "headless low-end Mac won't happen," "cheap flash-based iPod won't happen," "video iPod won't happen."

 

[it5five]

Don't get me wrong, I'd love for Apple to release this headless mid-range, but I just don't see it happening, mostly because of what QCassidy said, along with some other people.

 

[bradc]

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.

I'm sorry, but are you stupid & completely oblivious to the rest of the computing world? 99% of cases have their PSU's at the top, including full tower cases which are a hell of a lot taller than the Powermac. Why is everybody so worried about tipping? I find it hilarious that people think this. Go into any local computer, electronics store, they are ALL at the top. Other than the high-end cases you order seperately. Let's please drop this, it makes Macrumors look like Macmorons. People worrying about the power cord bending too much? Hahaha, whatever. The next best joke was people worrying about the rumored Magnesium iPods catching fire hahaha. It's called an alloy composition of different metals. Plus, using any logical reasoning do you think Apple or any company for that matter would put a product in a highly flammable case? Or in this case make the new tower 4ft tall with a 20lb PSU at the top and the case only being 6" wide?

Sorry, rant over.

EDIT: By 'you' I do not mean user cgc, by 'you' I mean the users that have brought this up. Sorry for singling you out cgc.

 

[DeepIn2U]

compared to this, yes.

See that case for the current PowerMac G5 is just so powerful, stout, immaculate and really looks STRONG!

putting the power cord above all other connections is a really stupid idea .. the cord is the heaviest and the thickest of all that connect to the computer. This might cause other connectors to get bent or dislodged.

I just hope Jonathan Ive can come up with an incredible design again for either the Mac Pro or the new iMac which will be TOUGH to beat.

 

[retroneo]

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).

Rubbish.

The Panasonic (Matsushita) SW-5582 is out now and burns CDs at 24x, burns DVDs at 8x.

http://elegantshopping1.stores.yahoo.net/pabluraysw.html

 

[Timepass]

See that case for the current PowerMac G5 is just so powerful, stout, immaculate and really looks STRONG!

putting the power cord above all other connections is a really stupid idea .. the cord is the heaviest and the thickest of all that connect to the computer. This might cause other connectors to get bent or dislodged.

I just hope Jonathan Ive can come up with an incredible design again for either the Mac Pro or the new iMac which will be TOUGH to beat.

Where do I start on what wrong with your post.

First off the power cowed is not the heavies and the thickest of all the connection to the computer. The montior cable by far ist he heavies and thickesk cable. 2nd off there no way that the power wire should even touch the other things plug into the comptuer (which minus the monitor cable are thing wires than bend really easily) and that just he wires for a mac. There still are printer out there in use that use Com ports to connect to the computer and those wires are thicker than the Power plug. (mind you fewer and fewer of the are out there but they still are in use jsut pointing out a thicker wire)
Hang naturely there is still a lot of clearnese from the things plug into the USB and firewire ports and the audio ports. Since it does not touch those wires it has no way to effect them.

if you dont believe me go look at a modern PC tower which has the PSU at the top for years. You will noticed that cord doesnt even come close to touching them.

as it been pointed out before move the PSU to the top has sevearl advatages and relitivly few draw back. Having at the top is better for cooling and for noise. (few fans in the sytem means less noice. Putting the PSU at the top allows the PSU fans to also help cool the computer).
Thing that the average joe will noticed. A quiter computer since there will be few fans over all in the computer.

 

[~Shard~]

Great. I guess there's nothing left to discuss, then. I'll call Steve and make it happen

Done and done. What's taking Steve so long?...

So they can span across two. I couldn't function with only one screen. Once you get used to two or more screens, you never want to go back to only one.

Screen spanning is cool, I quite enjoy working on 2 screens myself when I am given the opportunity. However, as Squire eluded to, not all prospective iMac buyers are the types to be wanting/needing 2 displays. I would argue that having a dual display setup is more of a "pro user" thing - you demonstrate this perfectly yourself, being the owner of one of those quad beasts.

 

[Glen Quagmire]

I'm sorry, but are you stupid & completely oblivious to the rest of the computing world? 99% of cases have their PSUs at the top, including full tower cases which are a hell of a lot taller than the Powermac. Why is everybody so worried about tipping? I find it hilarious that people think this. Go into any local computer, electronics store, they are ALL at the top. Other than the high-end cases you order seperately. Let's please drop this, it makes Macrumors look like Macmorons. People worrying about the power cord bending too much? Hahaha, whatever. The next best joke was people worrying about the rumored Magnesium iPods catching fire hahaha. It's called an alloy composition of different metals. Plus, using any logical reasoning do you think Apple or any company for that matter would put a product in a highly flammable case? Or in this case make the new tower 4ft tall with a 20lb PSU at the top and the case only being 6" wide?

Sorry, rant over.

EDIT: By 'you' I do not mean user cgc, by 'you' I mean the users that have brought this up. Sorry for singling you out cgc.

Thank the Lord that you are here to put things straight for the rest of us simpletons. How could we be so wrong?

Nice personal attack too - calling people stupid. Classy.

Not that good a rant. 3/10.

 

[Evangelion]

What about support for 2 30" cinema displays? You need two video cards to do that, right?

No you don't.

 

[Evangelion]

Kind of odd/funny how we seem to be going backwards in processor speeds.

The Mhz has nothing to do with the speed of the CPU. I find funny that I have to educate Mac-users about the Mhz-myth .

So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer?

You could buy such a computer long ago if you wanted to. And if you want lots of CPU's, Orion Multisystems would be more than happy to sell you a computer with 96 CPU's.

 

[Evangelion]

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...

I believe the problem Apple had with Quadras and the like was that they had zillion models with no real differences between them. Mac Mini, iMac, MacPro Mini and MacrPro would all have sustantial differences between them. And I don't think that they would be "unnecessary". They would be serving different types of consumers at different price-points. Someone would like to have a cheaper pro-machine, and iMac would not be suitable.

 

[Evangelion]

A while back I came up with ideal case for MacPro. I'll just quite myself from another thread:

Xserver and Xserve RAID (and servers from other manufacturers as well) has hard-drives that can be removed or added while the machine is running. You do not need to shut down the machine, you just pull the drive out and/or put a new one in. The drives are available right in front of the computer. I would like PowerMac to have something like this. HP's media Center computer has something similar. There is a slot in the front of the machine, where the user can add a hard-drive.

I think that Apple could have four such hard-drives in front of the machine quite easily. If the user is using RAID, and one of the drives is failing, he could just pull the failing HD out, and put in a new one, with zero downtime. If he needs more storage, he could just put in a new HD, without downtime and without having to resort to external HD's.

Take a look at Xserve RAID. Imagine four of those HD's in front of the PowerMac. The appearance might be similar to the one in Xserve, or maybe they could be "holed" like the current PowerMac is. But anyway, it would look GOOD, and it would be very convenient (and innovative. I haven't seen other workstations with such a setup).

Apple already has the technology. All they have to do is to move some of it over to the new PowerMac.

MacPRo could have that kind of setup, whereas MacPro Mini would have "traditional" HD-setup. MacPro could have dual optical slots, and four hot-swappable HD-bays, whereas MacPro Mini would have single optical and two internal HD-bays (like current PowerMac does).

 

[steve_hill4]

What strikes me is there are now a lot of people who are interested in a Mid-Tower Mac. When the Intel switch was announced, there were a few of us behind this move, others were dead set against it, complaining that the range would get too complicated and Apple like to keep their ranges small and simple. Now it appears more people are agreeing with us and that moving into the Intel world means they have to make this move, or comparisons with PCs will still be an "overpriced" iMac to a standard Dull biege box. This is also needed for those wanting to game and specifically dual boot their Macs for gaming and OSX for design and general purpose work where stability is high and risk of viruses is low.

Hopefully Apple employees will continue to silently read posts around here and the rest of the web and pick up on some ideas being posted.

As for the Mac Pro, I would really like to see Blu-Ray and 3GHz quad as BTO options. For all those complaining about these specs showing a top system supporting two 2.66GHz Woodcrests, not the 3.0GHz, I can guarantee you if this does happen, the 3Ghz will be BTO. The bottom system having 512MB of RAM though is ridiculous. I would say if it can be bought in in large enough bulk, 1GB for the bottom system(s) and 2GB for the top. Even PCs at about £1000 are starting to come with 2GB as standard.

 

[gopher]

Um.... The iMac Intel Core Duo support display spanning. So even if you have a second display, you can use it with the iMac Intel Core Duo. Can't do that with the Mini. I think it makes the iMac Intel Core Duo a nice in between model between the Mini and the Pro.

Quite true Squire - the iMac may not even be an option for many people who already have a nice 20" (or whatever) LCD display. Buying an iMac would be silly, as why would they want another screen?



Good idea, I like it. I would be fine with that type of aesthetic differentiation.

 

[steve_hill4]

Um.... The iMac Intel Core Duo support display spanning. So even if you have a second display, you can use it with the iMac Intel Core Duo. Can't do that with the Mini. I think it makes the iMac Intel Core Duo a nice in between model between the Mini and the Pro.

There is still a gap in the range though that means a Mid-range tower would be welcomed. Dual display support could also be absent from that to minimise costs.

 

[Keebler]

mid-range...schmid range

is the imac not the mid range computer everyone wants so desperately? You simply can buy a pc with the same specs (both hw and sw), including a wicked beautiful monitor built in, for the same price. it's in b/n a mini and the g5s.

people want computers at all levels. that's what dell does. oh, wait a sec...what happened to their stock in the last year? ..oh ya..it tanked. why...probably too much diversification is part of the reason.

i would much rather see a company keep a line of computers to a steady number and then concentrate on making those the best they can be. when you start adding in different configurations, it's just simple math that you compound any issues by x amount.

wrt the dual optical bays: i still think there's time b/n now and the wwdc so i wouldn't be surprised if they added an bluray burner to it. might be crazy to think a dual layer dvd superdrive, but maybe it will be an option. I realize the market may not be quite ready for HD dvd burners, but we all know apple likes to lead the charge in revolution so i wouldn't put it past them to try to take the lead in the computing world again. also, i think they would be nuts if they don't have a plan for this stuff incorporated into the new mac pros. it's been over 2 years since the g5s came out so these mac pros will be around for some time. i'm sure they have built into their market implementation plan.

personally, a regular dvd burner and an HD burner would be handy. more flexibility.

someone else mentioned the idea of mac adding a raid system. i think it would be a neat feature, but i can't see them doing it b/c you would think apple would want folks to buy their xraid server stuff if those ppl need more storage space. they would be shooting themselves in the foot by providing a complete or half way solution of mass storage within the g5.

either way, i don't really care i want the new mac pros to come out so the current g5s drop in price again so i can buy another one. sure...i know.... i know...the whole 'intel for the future' issue, but you know what:

some folks are still using old macs today and they work just fine

i know a new 'current' g5 will last a long, long time and work better than any crappy pc

my 2.5 cents

 

[Evangelion]

is the imac not the mid range computer everyone wants so desperately?

No. It might be that pricewise, but it's not that spec-wise. Some people don't want a built-in monitor, some people want an expandable computer. In that case, iMac is definitely not suitable. And neither is Mac Mini, since it's not expandable. And people who want such a system might want something beefier than Yonah/Merom and GMA (in Mac Mini).

people want computers at all levels. that's what dell does. oh, wait a sec...what happened to their stock in the last year? ..oh ya..it tanked. why...probably too much diversification is part of the reason.

You can't make that conclusion. "Dell offers multiple computers and their stock-price has tanked. Therefore offering multiple product-lines is bad". It doesn't quite work that way. And besides, Apple's share-price has been going down as well.

 

[mambodancer]

20" monitor

Quite true Squire - the iMac may not even be an option for many people who already have a nice 20" (or whatever) LCD display. Buying an iMac would be silly, as why would they want another screen?

This is exactly my situation. I bought an iMac 17" and have it sitting next to my 20" DVI connected monitor. Nor am I the only one I know with this arrangement. Why would you think this "silly?" Maybe you don't have any imagination?

 

[-x-]

Its on in the Video Card for me.

Now that Macs can run windows natively via bootcamp it gives gamers a chance to cut down on having to buy 2 computers. I have an Intel Imac that replaced my MDD about 7 months ago. While the x1600 is a decent low midrange card it still is not enough for a hardcore gamer. Having to spend 1500 on an Imac and then 1500 on a game rig makes no sense when you can buy a Mac Pro for the same price. You also get a better deal performance wise since for the same price you get a faster Mac then an Imac and a faster game rig then 1500 would buy you.

Mac Pro = win for Mac users who are heavy gamers.

Oh and BTW the Imac Display does not have the best refresh rate so you need a second monitor anyways for gaming.

 

[50548]

No. It might be that pricewise, but it's not that spec-wise. Some people don't want a built-in monitor, some people want an expandable computer. In that case, iMac is definitely not suitable. And neither is Mac Mini, since it's not expandable. And people who want such a system might want something beefier than Yonah/Merom and GMA (in Mac Mini).

Sometimes I have the impression that MR members don't really feel the market, and want a mini-tower just for the sake of it...for 99% of the world, what must be expanded is RAM and perhaps HD, nothing else.

What else is NOT there? You have BT, FW, USB, good GPU, Audio and Video ports...apart from a TINY FEW specialized boards (which should be used by MacPro target users anyway), I don't see any rationale for a weaker Mini Tower, even though I continue to see a band of supporters for such idea in this forum.

You can't make that conclusion. "Dell offers multiple computers and their stock-price has tanked. Therefore offering multiple product-lines is bad". It doesn't quite work that way. And besides, Apple's share-price has been going down as well.

Not only has its stock tanked, but also its inventory levels (gone up) and profitability. Dell just announced, for instance, that it will finish the ridiculous mail-in rebates, as they create so much confusion in the market. That's why Apple is so great...they keep it simple.

A Mini Tower is the modern equivalent of a Cube...release a cheapo lower-end MacPro and you are set to go...no need for a MT whatsoever, despite the moans of a few select MR users, or nostalgic hobbyists of the past.