Too bad it looks like the regular version of OSX won't have ZFS support, and I'm sure not paying $1k on top of the $3k for a Mac Pro just so I can run ZFS.
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 Xeon Processors 'Imminent'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
True about the display cards but that Kona is an HD/SD Capture card. Those are good too though
Your G5's case is probably still in mint condish since it just sits on your desk (and if you're like me, even the box is perfect and sitting in your attic.
Why not considering treating yourself to an Intel machine when these come out and giving your old machine to a family member. You could drop a few hundred more on a decent sized monitor -- wow! What a great gift!
See what going to class gets me? A lot of posts to catch up on...
My belief is that Intel... see, the Westmere date has stayed the same even though the Nehalem dates have been pushed back. I personally don't believe that they will be able to deliver Westmere when they originally wanted to, simply because they've pushed Nehalem back (plus recession for those that think that matters).
I'll bet the time between Nehalem and Westmere is similar to the time between Penryn and Nehalem and Woodcrest (right?) and Penryn.
I don't know of any displays 24" to 29" with anything other than 1920x1200...
Not a trade show, but that's been said.
It's this kind of optimism that makes people sad. Be careful.
Like the quick sketch that I did in my thread (look at the picture of my Griffin Amplifi for a better interpretation)?
Yeah, I can see that.
So, what do y'all think, will we see MacPros use the Westmere-Gulftown 6-core or the Westmere-Clarkdale 2-core?
I have to say, a 12 core Pro would be very nice indeed.
My belief is that Intel... see, the Westmere date has stayed the same even though the Nehalem dates have been pushed back. I personally don't believe that they will be able to deliver Westmere when they originally wanted to, simply because they've pushed Nehalem back (plus recession for those that think that matters).
I'll bet the time between Nehalem and Westmere is similar to the time between Penryn and Nehalem and Woodcrest (right?) and Penryn.
I don't know of any displays 24" to 29" with anything other than 1920x1200...
Not a trade show, but that's been said.
It's this kind of optimism that makes people sad. Be careful.
Like the quick sketch that I did in my thread (look at the picture of my Griffin Amplifi for a better interpretation)?
Yeah, I can see that.
When? PM G4 Mirror Drive Door model was released in August 2002, and the first PM G5 came out in June 2003.
What have trade shows got to do with anything?
Why would they hold it off? Because the Mac Pro is the perfect machine to demo Grand Central in Snow Leopard. Launch them together, they are a match made in heaven
Well if they are confident about a shipping date for Leopard.
They could call a press event the day the new MacPro's are ready and still show off Snow leopard at the event. The SL launch date is generally announced 6-8weeks prior.
Which would put it a few weeks prior to WWDC.
What, the current graphics cards are not going to be powerful enough to render the OSX environment? They will use their hardware acceleration, that doesn't mean they are going to need a GTX295 to do it.
ZFS is already implemented in Leopard, just open a console and play around. http://zfs.macosforge.org will keep you up to date with the releases. I use it regularly over iSCSI.
It's ALL software RAID, "hardware" RAID is software RAID.
http://storagemojo.com/2006/08/15/zfs-performance-versus-hardware-raid/
http://milek.blogspot.com/2006/08/hw-raid-vs-zfs-software-raid-part-ii.html
Old articles but you get the idea.
You wouldn't be using anything but a cheapass RAID controller in your desktop anyhow, unless you have serious money to spend. You wouldn't be asking these questions if you already knew all that.
Same with me.See what going to class gets me? A lot of posts to catch up on...
I don't know of any interim resolution between 1920x1200 and 2560x1600 (except for different aspect ratios).
Well that is true, but my main thinking behind a WWDC launch of the Mac Pro alongside Snow Leopard is mainly due to the fact that the Mac Pro is the one product which is going to really shine with the new OS.
It doesn't make sense to me that Apple would launch the Mac Pro knowing that 3-4 months later there will be a new OS which will make much better use of the the hardware in the Mac Pro compared with 10.5... unless Snow Leopard is going to be a free upgrade of course.
If Apple introduces a new hardware platform and a new OS simultaneously, one would really be advised to wait a few months before jumping in unless possessed of an adventurous spirit.
I don't have a work order, I have funding to build a digital microscopy system. The rate at which optics and digital cameras change is slow, compared to computers, and I have ordered those parts. But I'm lothe to order the computer, knowing that even Apple can't ignore the progress that's been made in processor technology in the last year, so I can reasonably expect a major system update very soon. Given that whatever computer I buy to go with this microscope is likely to be the system I'm stuck with for several years, I don't want to start with something that's already embarrassingly out of date.
The bottom line is that I could do what I need to do with the current Mac Pro, but I could do it a lot faster with a cheaper Dell. I'd rather have a Mac, because OS X is a better environment for most of what I do, but unless Apple releases something that is competitive within the next few weeks I may have to swallow my pride and buy a Dell.
Cheers
are we ever going to see an updated iMac or Mac Mini? Not many folks have $3K to shell out on a desktop computer that will depreciate by almost 50% after one calendar year.
Blu-ray included?
Different / fast CPU nice
Would be very interested to do more with a Mac Pro in stead of doing the same faster.
Any rumours regarding the introduction of Blu-Ray
Would be great to finally complete my HD authoring.
Coen
Different / fast CPU nice
Would be very interested to do more with a Mac Pro in stead of doing the same faster.
Any rumours regarding the introduction of Blu-Ray
Would be great to finally complete my HD authoring.
Coen
Please don't hijack this thread. There are threads complaining about iMac and Mac Mini updates elsewhere.
Any rumours regarding the introduction of Blu-Ray
Would be great to finally complete my HD authoring.
"Bag of hurt."
Different / fast CPU nice
Would be very interested to do more with a Mac Pro in stead of doing the same faster.
Any rumours regarding the introduction of Blu-Ray
Would be great to finally complete my HD authoring.
Coen
By the way, I would not be surprised if the new iMacs and Mac Pros include a BD-RE Superdrive and the ability to play back Blu-ray movies. It would work very well on the iMac since with the built-in Ethernet connection implementing BD-Live is a cinch.
Contrary to what Steve Jobs thinks, Apple could get Blu-ray support if the Blu-ray Disk Association offers a volume discount on licensing the technology. After all, if the rumors are correct the next-generation iMacs with the latest nVidia chipsets already implement High-bandwith Digital Content Protection (HDCP) in hardware (including both versions of DisplayPort), so only a minor change in the MacOS X 10.6 ("Snow Leopard") code is necessary to get full software support.
I would.
That... IS what Steve Jobs thinks. He won't let some software engineer just add the appropriate code for Blu-ray without his say-so.
And he doesn't want to say, so...
Little play on words there.
I donno, that looks pretty buggy... actually really buggy... oh and it doesn't boot yet.
You've convinced me once again that ZFS is supercool and the best thing evar, but the fact remains: Using this hackjob driver with the known issues page including things like "kernel panic" and "infinite loop" is really not akin to "support."
This isn't like a video card driver or something, this is storage! (SPARTAA!!) It's the one thing that needs to basically have 100% of the kinks worked out before you start using it.
So for all intents and purposes, ZFS is not for Leopard at all, and is only promised in Snow Leopard Server.
As for video cards, I really don't think gaming is an insignificant reason to keep the tech up to date. Luckily there are other reasons too. Apple has committed themselves to implementing OpenCL into the next OS release. OpenCL offloads even non-graphics tasks onto the GPU. It's like one of the major points of 10.6, you can google it.
Again, I don't think games are a bad reason for Apple to "get with the program" on video cards for Mac Pro, but there are plenty of other reasons for demanding this.
And going back to the main point: Simply bumping up the CPU speed once a year is really not very significant. It really seems like obsession to simply focus on "OMFG WHEN WE GONNA GET NEHALEM" rather than "is this machine that much better than last year?" Spending 3 seconds less rendering something in Photoshop isn't what a $3G computer is all about, you know.
Different / fast CPU nice
Would be very interested to do more with a Mac Pro in stead of doing the same faster.
meaningless distinction
I think that most people will agree with the following definitions of hardware and software RAID.
Hardware RAID has the following advantages:
I think that most people will agree with the following definitions of hardware and software RAID.
Software RAID - The low levels of the operating system storage stack sees multiple "storage units" (disks, volumes, LUNs, partitions,...). In the OS storage stack, these "units" are combined in some fashion and presented to higher layers of the storage stack as a single virtual "unit". The higher levels put file systems, directories and files on the virtual "unit". This can make it difficult to boot from the virtual "unit", since the unit doesn't exist until after the OS is booted!
Hardware RAID - Firmware (software) running outside the OS takes the multiple "storage units" and combines them into the desired virtual "unit" - often called a LUN. The PCIe/PCI/PCI-X controller card presents this LUN to the lowest levels of the operating system as a "disk" (usually a SCSI disk). Booting is simple, even old operating systems, DOS floppies, DVDs, thumb drives and the like can boot - because the hardware presents the storage as a standard disk.
Hardware RAID - Firmware (software) running outside the OS takes the multiple "storage units" and combines them into the desired virtual "unit" - often called a LUN. The PCIe/PCI/PCI-X controller card presents this LUN to the lowest levels of the operating system as a "disk" (usually a SCSI disk). Booting is simple, even old operating systems, DOS floppies, DVDs, thumb drives and the like can boot - because the hardware presents the storage as a standard disk.
Hardware RAID has the following advantages:
- Fewer boot issues - the LUN is formed outside the OS, and all that is needed is an OS driver for the controller or interface card. This usually looks like any other SCSI card to the OS.
- Higher reliability - the software in the hardware RAID controller is independent of the OS software. An OS crash does not affect the RAID controller. This is very important, since many RAID operations require multiple IOs to complete, and if the OS crashes in the middle the virtual "unit" can be corrupted.
- Higher performance - not only is the RAID overhead offloaded from the host, but controllers often contain large caches. A standard HP ProLiant comes with a 512 MiB on-controller cache.
- Much higher RAID-5/6/50/60 performance - higher end controllers have a battery to back up the data in the cache. This makes it safe for the controller to buffer writes to a RAID with parity array, which can eliminate many extra reads and writes. If OS-level software RAID buffers writes, a crash means that the buffered write didn't make it to the disk - the volume is corrupted.
I agree. I pulled the trigger on the Mac Pro recently. It is still a beast and I was able to upgrade the ram due to cheap ddr2 kits. Westmere might be a more prudent wait and a quicker refresh than the current one.
Thank you for your Wikipedia repost. When you have actually used any of these technologies, instead of cherry picking random information online, then you're allowed to comment on them. I've used a zillion enterprise level storage controllers, SANs and software RAID solutions in the past 12 years. ZFS is a completely different animal.
I'd love for you to show me statistical data that supports your claims of "Fewer Boot Issues", "Higher Reliability", "Higher Performance", "Much higher RAID-5/6/50/60 performance".
Really buggy according to who? You? The one who has never used it before, got it. Did you actually read under which instances those faults surface? Who said ANYTHING about booting, Sun JUST released ZFS booting in their latest Solaris release.
Have you read the known issues for ZFS from Sun? How about known issues for HFS+? Or every other filesystem / volume manager in existence.
3 less seconds in Photoshop may not be a big deal, how about 3 less hours in rendering or compressiong HD video? The people who need the fastest CPUs currently out are the ones excited for this. Clearly you are not.