4 cores isn't as expensive as most people believe. Even if they're going to be idle I'm going to pick a slower quad core over a faster dual core for general computing. $150-180 gets your foot in the door for a quad core processor.
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.
Nehalem EP (Xeon) Processors 'Ridiculously fast'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
For most Mac Pro buyers waiting until March/April for the new model isn't going to be a big problem given that Nehalem will be bringing a lot of muscle and it'll let Apple actually hold a press event for a professional product, something they almost never do.
I've given up on ever seeing a mid-priced desktop/tower from Apple ever again because it would force Apple to negotiate deals on a wider variety of components and, mostly, because Steve Jobs believes computers should be sealed boxes like household appliances. When was the last time you upgraded the heat pump or insulation in your refrigerator? When it's not good enough anymore you're supposed to buy a whole new one. Upgradeable towers run counter to his profit focused world view.
I believe the perfect lineup has 4 notebooks and 4 desktops. I'd replace the Mini with a Nano that uses the same parts as the MacBook to reduce cost and inventory issues. They could charge more because it'd be a legitimate performer and it might actually cost less to produce than the Mini.
I'd also cut down on the standard configurations. I see no point in having three different MacBooks, two 20" iMacs or two MacBook Airs. Just make one model and let people CTO a different processor, HD, RAM, etc.
NetBook
MacNano (same as MacBook minus the display, battery, kb, trackpad)
MacBook
iMac 20"
MacBlade (mythical small desktop/tower)
MacBook Air
iMac 24"
MacBook Pro 15"
MacBook Pro 17"
Mac Pro
I've given up on ever seeing a mid-priced desktop/tower from Apple ever again because it would force Apple to negotiate deals on a wider variety of components and, mostly, because Steve Jobs believes computers should be sealed boxes like household appliances. When was the last time you upgraded the heat pump or insulation in your refrigerator? When it's not good enough anymore you're supposed to buy a whole new one. Upgradeable towers run counter to his profit focused world view.
I believe the perfect lineup has 4 notebooks and 4 desktops. I'd replace the Mini with a Nano that uses the same parts as the MacBook to reduce cost and inventory issues. They could charge more because it'd be a legitimate performer and it might actually cost less to produce than the Mini.
I'd also cut down on the standard configurations. I see no point in having three different MacBooks, two 20" iMacs or two MacBook Airs. Just make one model and let people CTO a different processor, HD, RAM, etc.
NetBook
MacNano (same as MacBook minus the display, battery, kb, trackpad)
MacBook
iMac 20"
MacBlade (mythical small desktop/tower)
MacBook Air
iMac 24"
MacBook Pro 15"
MacBook Pro 17"
Mac Pro
Yeah... and you were talking about slimming the lines?
MacTablet (13" slab; no swiveling screen, no ODD)
MacBook
MacBook Air
MacBook Pro
Whatever becomes of the Apple TV/Mac Mini
iMac
Mac Pro
Steve will never do an xMac. Wait until he dies.
If I have the current mac pro...would it be possible to put in these newer processors that are coming out, into this computer? And if not, why not?
that is probably a really dumb question so sorry in advance
that is probably a really dumb question so sorry in advance
A Tablet has a better chance of coming out than a mid-range tower?
Steve hates them both. I give it a 3% better chance.
If I have the current mac pro...would it be possible to put in these newer processors that are coming out, into this computer? And if not, why not?
that is probably a really dumb question so sorry in advance
Different socket, different bus speed, different RAM speed.
I think you "misunderestimate" human stupidity; I've had people try return 8800GTX's with the last 3/4 of the card sawed off because it wouldn't fit in the case.
If I have the current mac pro...would it be possible to put in these newer processors that are coming out, into this computer? And if not, why not?
that is probably a really dumb question so sorry in advance
Not a dumb question at all, but why would you need to drop in the next gen chip if you have a current machine? It's not like the current Mac Pro is going to be any slower.
And here I am sticking 4GBs of RAM in my dual core G5. Might just take it all the way to 16GB just for the hell of it, and because the 2GB chips only cost $27.
Best way to do that would be to make a mini-tower using lower power desktop parts - and then sell fewer Mac Pros.
- Mac Pro, the SUV of desktop computers -
(Dell, 5.9 kg, 235 watt power supply. Mac Pro, 19.2 kg, ~1000 watt power supply)
Attachments
Best way to do that would be to make a mini-tower using lower power desktop parts - and then sell fewer Mac Pros.
- Mac Pro, the SUV of desktop computers -
Mac Pro the Hummer of desktop computers.
Mac Pro, a work station, and not ridiculous like a Hummer or SUV as some would suggest
This has basically been true for every "server" CPU that Intel has ever made (EDIT: except the first - the Pentium Pro).
Thanks for doing this for me.
Wrong. There are vast differences between the chips and supporting chipsets. Read more. *sigh*
Maybe The Steve will notice that any thread about the Mini or the Mac Pro turns into a mini-tower thread.
Only for those delusional enough to think that Apple should have a different line up to the existing.
Stop pretending that you know more on the subject than Eidorian (because, come on... it's Eidorian!) and either prove him wrong or accept that you were.
Back on Topic.... ish.
Popped into the Regents Street Apple Store the other night and there were only 3 mac pros on display. This probably doesn't seem that surprising unless you are familiar with the store which normally has about 10. I think the updates must come very soon, and wouldn't be at all surprised if Intel are being deliberately vague to keep Apple happy. New Mac Pro's at Macworld I think. (perhaps I should say 'hope'!)
Popped into the Regents Street Apple Store the other night and there were only 3 mac pros on display. This probably doesn't seem that surprising unless you are familiar with the store which normally has about 10. I think the updates must come very soon, and wouldn't be at all surprised if Intel are being deliberately vague to keep Apple happy. New Mac Pro's at Macworld I think. (perhaps I should say 'hope'!)
Being a consumer expo, I don't think so. If the update is that soon, they'll do it the Tuesday before MacWorld like they did this year.
And if not, it'll be at WWDC. Yes, they would keep the same hardware that long. They did it last time.
If you look at the buyers guide then it clearly shows we are approaching the longest time between updates in the history of the mac pro/powermac. I know the update before the current generation was just a drop in CPU replacement and was therefore very little effort for Apple, but I don't think we should use that lack of complexity on their part as an example of what to expect in the future. The actual performance increase from that simple upgrade was very large indeed, in fact it was probably one of the single biggest performance increases to the top end of their Pro lineup. I really think Apple wont wait until WWDC to update, but agree it may not actually at Macworld. However, I think apple's reluctance to release previous Mac Pro updates at Macworld has more to do with the updates not being very glamourous. This might be different, particularly if there is a change to the case on top of the new architecture.