Digital Skunk
macrumors G3
I agree 1000% and I hope Apple puts more effort into the internal hardware than the external look. We need this next Mac Pro to be more affordable and less cute.
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 Unavailable for In-Store Reservations at Many Locations
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree 1000% and I hope Apple puts more effort into the internal hardware than the external look. We need this next Mac Pro to be more affordable and less cute.
Corbin052198
macrumors 6502
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
No kidding the Mac Pro needs an update!
Remember in the early days of Intel Macs when the iMac looked like it's PowerPC counterpart, the MacBooks looked like the iBooks, the MacBook Pro like the PowerBook, and so on? Can you also remember when the Mac Pros looked like the PowerMac? Oh yeah....... THEY STILL DO!!!!!
It still looks like someone shot a PC tower with a gun and slapped handle bars on top. And it doesn't even have a shiny metal logo 😛
No kidding the Mac Pro needs an update!
Remember in the early days of Intel Macs when the iMac looked like it's PowerPC counterpart, the MacBooks looked like the iBooks, the MacBook Pro like the PowerBook, and so on? Can you also remember when the Mac Pros looked like the PowerMac? Oh yeah....... THEY STILL DO!!!!!
It still looks like someone shot a PC tower with a gun and slapped handle bars on top. And it doesn't even have a shiny metal logo 😛
I couldn't care less about the looks as long as they refresh them. I'm getting tired of waiting for a refresh that never comes.
Apple really needs to add a third option to the Mac Pro series that's not a Xeon model. A high-end i7 with a better graphics card at least gives them a prosumer model without going full on professional as the Mac Pro currently is and that would somewhat take away the argument of iMacs not really being upgradeable, which I will be the first to admit that I'm never buying another iMac for the price that you can't really do anything with it.
Give me a regular Mac Pro with an Intel i7-950 or 960, no less than an ATI 5800 series graphics card, ram expandable up to 32GB and a clean internal compartment for more storage and optical bays plus USB 3.0 and HDMI and they'll grab more customers.
Cause really, as it stands right now, the iMacs are not that much more powerful than the 15" or 17" Macbook pro and that's a bit ridiculous considering how much the iMac is when fully configured that it's barely a performance boost over their laptops.
Give me a regular Mac Pro with an Intel i7-950 or 960, no less than an ATI 5800 series graphics card, ram expandable up to 32GB and a clean internal compartment for more storage and optical bays plus USB 3.0 and HDMI and they'll grab more customers.
Cause really, as it stands right now, the iMacs are not that much more powerful than the 15" or 17" Macbook pro and that's a bit ridiculous considering how much the iMac is when fully configured that it's barely a performance boost over their laptops.
TuffLuffJimmy
macrumors G3
Obviously you're not someone in the market for a Mac Pro. If you were you wouldn't care how old the case design is. Besides the internal organization has had some major overhauls and that's what matters in the case design. It's already the most beautiful of all work station tower designs.
macpro2000
macrumors 65816
Intersting point. While I believe aesthetics are an integral part in Apple products, I'm hard pressed to imagine what Apple could do to improve upon the Mac Pro design. It's not just aesthetics, the case serves a major purpose in function. The aluminum and holes create a cool and well ventilated frame, and the interior is so well designed an amateur could easily meander around until they became well aquainted with the ins and outs of computer technology. The only aspect that would seem reasonably changed would be the style, not the materials. Maybe adding some black to the chassis in line with the black and aluminum stylings of the iMac, MacBooks and 24" LED LCD.
wimbledonsound
macrumors newbie
Amen to that. The Mac Pro is way more beautiful inside than out, and becomes more perfect with every revision. I thought my G5 was good until I added a drive to a friends mac.
Mind you, if it were rack mountable a lot of us would be happier. I could never hacksaw the handles off like some barbarians do...
macpro2000
macrumors 65816
By far more beautiful inside than out...Can't say how many times I've shown the insides...and mine is from 06.
It's not an objet d'art. It a computer. It sits on the floor under my desk. A billion wires come out of the back to a bunch of FW800 drives from OWC with similar styling that sit on my desk.
But I'll tell you one thing: I also have a Alienware Area 51 with that cool alien guy, blue light, space age looking cooling vents on top - in short, that Alienware thing is supremely UGLY. The MacPros look simple; the hole and materials have a function (cooling), and the handles let me pick it up (though I preferred the less hand gouging G4 handles for comfort, though they were ugly).
The MacPro metal case is functional, which makes it beautiful imho.
About time
I'm currently using an iMac, but my previous machines were a Powermac dual G4 867, and prior to that a Powermac G4 400. You just can't beat the Powermac/MacPro line. If you buy a decent one, it's good for about 8-10 years.
Everyone's fighting about blueray. I finally decided that H.264 is the way to go. Part of the reason I'm looking for a PowerMac is to convert my 20+ hours of 1080 home video to H.264 of the same resolution. Decoding one hour of this video on my current (decent) machine takes about 20-hrs. with Roxio Toast. Other programs are faster, but don't sync the video and audio very well.
For what it's worth, I still fire up my G4 867 from time to time. It still works great, and OS 9 is good for a few memories.
I'm currently using an iMac, but my previous machines were a Powermac dual G4 867, and prior to that a Powermac G4 400. You just can't beat the Powermac/MacPro line. If you buy a decent one, it's good for about 8-10 years.
Everyone's fighting about blueray. I finally decided that H.264 is the way to go. Part of the reason I'm looking for a PowerMac is to convert my 20+ hours of 1080 home video to H.264 of the same resolution. Decoding one hour of this video on my current (decent) machine takes about 20-hrs. with Roxio Toast. Other programs are faster, but don't sync the video and audio very well.
For what it's worth, I still fire up my G4 867 from time to time. It still works great, and OS 9 is good for a few memories.
Finally!!
so, should we expect the update on Tuesday. Tomorrow is Tuesday, I can't wait to see the new Mighty MP.
so, should we expect the update on Tuesday. Tomorrow is Tuesday, I can't wait to see the new Mighty MP.
Apple is no fan for gaming on Mac. And most Mac games are old or have poor FPS. Plus most of people who would buy the i7; will install win7; which won't make it good idea in my opinion.
Most of game that is going to release in the next few months are meant for Win users; few will bother about Mac.
Couldn't agree more. I think it is LITERALLY CRIMINAL that they charge more in other countries...and not just 'cause it's to cover extra costs.
xbjllb
macrumors 65816
wimbledonsound
macrumors newbie
It took me until 2006 to move my studio machine to G5/OSX because my G4 ran Logic under OS9 so well (they never really put the snappiness back in that UI, despite all the horsepower). The noise is a different matter... I used to have to throw a duvet over it to record!
Umbongo
macrumors 601
For every 900 series Core i7 processor there is a Xeon version available at the same clockspeed, same cost to Apple, but with ECC memory support. There is no reason for Apple to use Core i7 processors in the Mac Pro.
for the same amount of money - "Apple's top Pro machine doesn't even come close to a custom build windows machine"
If you would pay the same amount of money for a custom build windows machine as you would for Apples "TOP" pro machine. The Apple computer wouldn't even come close to the windows machine, it would actually make the MacPro look as if its a basic computer with poor performance and cheap hardware...oh wait, it is a basic computer with poor performance (considering its price tag) and cheap hardware. goes for all Macs actually...the only thing Pro about a MacPro or MBP is the word.
Whatever...
I won't argue that single processor version of the Mac Pro is a bit lean on comparative value, but the dual processor versions are priced competitively with HP's Z800 and Lenovo's D20 workstations.
The Mac Pro isn't a gaming machine. Point taken. The Mac Pro is designed for people that use the apps that generate income; hence the term "pro" apps.
Being one of those people, I can tell you that the initial hardware cost is the least expensive item I have to deal with.
BTW.
I'm not a graphic designer like you are; I really can use the performance of a dual Xeon 5680's...
I actually priced the HP Z800 and Lenovo D20, and for my money, I'll go with the Mac Pro and an aftermarket Quadro FX 4800 (though I'd kill for the new ATI's)
Solidworks 2009 Premium and Premium Simulation (once I'm back on maintenance in a couple of months, make that 2011)
CFDesign
GibbsCAM
Pro/Engineer Wildfire 4
Maxwell Render (which will absolutely use all of the cores available)
throw in the next FCS and I'm a happy guy
xgman
macrumors 603
How are you guys going to feel if the imac gets an update Tuesday or soon after, and no Mac Pro just yet? Wouldn't that be 2 imac updates and zero MP updates? Performance is close enough now on the top imac. I imagine an imac update without a MP one might surpass the current MP.
Personally Id be pissed however the money im using is not mine but budgeted from employer. Ive lost faith but willing to wait it out.
So true, support contract for Maya is same as a new low-end Mac Pro. And thats only piece of software I have to deal with.
But to date, were using Maya on a Boxx 8400 Windows 7 system.
I generally like Adobe/FCS/Avid/Protools on the Mac Pro side.
Digital Skunk
macrumors G3
I think most Mac users from the days of the $1299 tower kept their machines until they were truly dead. As I type this on a 12" Powerbook G4, I think about how good those years were for Apple tech.
Very VERY easily. Especially with Windows 7. There are some things I would have to get used to, and some things I wish Windows programmers would make a lot better, but W7 is good enough and when paired with top hardware and Adobe CS5 it just dusts what Apple has to offer in many regards.
Let's not forget that "PRO" doesn't mean pushing high end gear to the max. I am sure many of us visual artists have dealt with clients that make 5x-->10x as much money as we do, and only use Excel on a daily basis.
For many PRO just means it has to work. Which I actually think Apple has done with many of their laptops. I just don't think the price jump comes from that aspect.
Also, as of this moment, I am very sceptical that Apple will really put some effort into FCS. Adobe Premier and of course Avid are just mopping the floor with FCP in all of the aspects that cutters want. Especially not having to render after each and every slight adjustment.
I'll use it if a client wants me to, but I am 12" from going full Master Collection.
On a side note, I 100% agree, when you are using apps like you describe, the Mac Pro's 8 core price is very competitive. For joe-schmo freelancer like myself.... not so much.