Sounds like clueless nonsense. Not only is this not new info, it is wrong on numerous fronts.
Nothing new here at all...move along...
I agree with most of what you wrote here, except this.".... One thing about the Mac Pro update in June really didn't make sense. It didn't include a Thunderbolt port. ... "
An exceeding dubious statement since Thunderbolt solves no problem that the Mac Pro has. The Mac Pro has PCI-e sockets. The Mac Pro has multiple video outputs. To a large extent it is gratuitous uniformity that pounds the table for Thunderbolt for the Mac Pro. Let alone the fact that the June update was just a speed bump. Why would it have any other port not previously present.
If want to point to something that could have been updated if had planned ahead was the video card trapped in time. Not the lack of Thunderbolt.
The Mac Pro is not Apple's flagship product. The Macintosh was many years ago, but the Mac Pro never has been. It is just something they make to support the needs of a niche part of their customer base.How can Apple continue to justify that the flagship Computing device it sells does not feature it's highest speed data interconnect?
Doesn't make sense when many of the major components by volume are not square. PCI-e cards, storage ( HDDs/SDDs), power supply(s), PCI-e slot layout , RAM+CPU layout are not square, etc. . To inject "squareness" to contain non square items is a dubious design choice.I would like the Mac Pro to be more square with space being utilised in every location minus the four corners for the handles.
Is it suppose to be a workstation or a NAS/SAN box? 12 storage devices is a change in mission.If you filled in the space between the two top and bottom handles I reckon you could fit an extra 12 HDs in there.
If the market were large enough and the fratricide/cannibalization with other Mac products low enough then it would make just as much sense as:Introducing differently sized enclosures is silly for the Mac Pro line up. It would be like introducing differently sized Mac Minis: Mac Nano, Mac Micro and Mac Milli.
As pointed out it isn't a flagship product. Biggest and heaviest isn't even flagship in naval terms.I agree with most of what you wrote here, except this.
How can Apple continue to justify that the flagship Computing device it sells does not feature it's highest speed data interconnect?
No, the marketplace is killing off Firewire. Apple is largely just reflecting what most folks are buying and system vendors are deploying.Apple is killing off firewire.
The vast majority of these vendors all sold PCI-e cards. The thunderbolt devices are pragmatically these same PCI-e cards wrapped in an external container. If you need the functionality it is availble in two forms. The Mac Pro already takes the PCI-e card form factor of their solutions. Most shops oriented around the Mac Pro already have them. That makes those Thunderbolt form factor devices redundant and better matched to the Macs without PCI-e slots.The 3rd party companies that make the external devices for content creation pros are all shifting to Thunderbolt.
It is far more likely with higher end A/V capture cards that it is proprietary, non standard, connectors that you are buying. This issue that primarily matters is having that particular vendor's connector. I think you are looking at the wrong end of the box.Sure you can buy audio or video boxes that use firewire, and will work just dandy with a current Mac Pro, but why would you buy something that is already obsolete?
This is just misdirection. First, these are all tools. Matching the right tools to the right job is the primary task to be undertakend. Second, there is a better than 50/50 chance that the Mac Pro will have Firewire. The Mac Mini has it and has plenty of room on the Mac Pro edges for at least 2 Firewire (there are 4 ports now. Dropping down to 2 would actually be simpler and more cost effective to do than doing the current 4. ). Third if there was some huge driving market demand for combo USB 3.0 + Firewire card they would pop up for a PCI-e slot enabled Mac Pro.Instead of asking what problems does TB solve, ask how likely it is that Apple will continue to put firewire on anything?
Two factors. First, in the context of current Mac Pro ( and competitive workstations ) user base which is the larger group.You also have to consider that folks are already using TB drives in the field,
It isn't the Mac Pro's that are primarily constrained. If problem solving is reduced to matching the logos on the connectors on the cables to the one's on the sockets on the box then yeah there are limitations.The Mac Pros are helpless!
Well said: I've tried to explain this to people in various ways with varying degrees of success. I think there's a hangover from people old enough to remember the days when Power Macs of various forms were Apple's flagship product. Seems these people have trouble imaging a world in which a big desktop box is not only not the flagship, but is by far the lowest selling hardware Apple sells.The Mac Pro is not Apple's flagship product. The Macintosh was many years ago, but the Mac Pro never has been. It is just something they make to support the needs of a niche part of their customer base.