"New Macs for 2010 are going to take Apple to the next level"

[Icaras]

I just picked up a refurb 2009 2.66 quad for $2150 . Haven't even opened it and have another week or so to return it. Your pricing rationale seems reasonable. If the new quads will be priced about $2500, would it be wise to hold on to this and save $350 rather than wait for a 2101 quad at $2500?

Btw, I don't know how much tax you had to pay, but here in California, tax is 9.25% and for me, it would actually be cheaper to buy a brand new '09 quad 2.66 at somewhere like Amazon or J&R, where tax is not included. And both sites mentioned usually sell the base Mac Pro for $2299 flat.

 

[Abyssgh0st]

I know what Steve Jobs was talking about; a Mac Pro tower with the revolutionary Celeron processor! Reason being is because a 12" touch screen is being added to the side of the tower as an efficient way to view your CPU temps.

 

[peskaa]

Do you think the quad core low end will see a price cut then?

No. They won't be using the same CPUs, and Xeons don't move much anyway. So, the models available may be:

1) Quad (Two models)
2) Six-core (One model)
3) Octo (Two models)
4) Dual six-core (One model)

I'd find that line up quite interesting actually, as it offers quite a lot of range in terms of core numbers. However, I can see Apple backing out of some of those options to reduce the number of lines available, but who knows.

 

[chet.d]

Congratulations! Nice system! And nice buy too. Damn, 16GB of RAM and SSD for that price. I am full of envy right now

I'm sure you'll have tons of fun (and hours of productive work of course ) with your machine. Great investment you have there.

Hey thanks.

I'm waiting for a software upgrade (from nuendo 3 to 4) and need to get a 3 rd drive. So she's taunting me just sitting there till I can make the switch in the studio.
I so can't wait.

 

[cjmillsnun]

The solution would be letting me use my hardware as I see fit.

Actually not. How are standards to advance if people carry on using the same old crap. Case in point is the pain web developers are going through with IE6.

Flash is a buggy, slow, inefficient piece of crap that deserves to die. Rich content can be served using other means that are efficient and open standards.

Until big companies drop support for these old technologies, then we won't move to the next level.

 

[snouter]

The solution would be letting me use my hardware as I see fit.

Actually not. How are standards to advance if people carry on using the same old crap. Case in point is the pain web developers are going through with IE6.

Last time I checked, IE6 was software.

 

[nanofrog]

I just picked up a refurb 2009 2.66 quad for $2150 . Haven't even opened it and have another week or so to return it. Your pricing rationale seems reasonable. If the new quads will be priced about $2500, would it be wise to hold on to this and save $350 rather than wait for a 2101 quad at $2500?

I'll presume you're well aware of the technical issues/bugs, and can deal with it since nothing has been done so far, and officially it's not even acknowledged.

That said, I'd keep it, as I don't expect a price drop on the next system release. It's harder to say about future models, but given the general direction, Intel's prices are rising, and Apple's desire for high margins, I wouldn't expect a price drop to occur then either.

There'd have to be major changes in what gets used component wise to make a drastic reduction in manufacturing costs for that to happen.

Nice, thanks again Nano (and everyone) for their knowledge and advice. I was just looking at the refurb store and saw the same $2150 2009 2.66 quad. Pretty tempting at that price....

Given your budget, it seems to be the best way to go IMO. But as it was mentioned, consider the pricing with taxes and shipping with other sources such as Amazon.

Worth a few minutes to price shop anyway.

 

[akadmon]

If they can possibly deliver a quad core at a price point closer to $1999, then Apple will make a Mac Pro customer out of me yet.

Thanks for a good laugh, man!

Apple is more likely to deliver a 6-core MP to your doorstep for $1999 (I'm talking about shipping cost here, so don't get excited) than it is to sell one to you at this price.

 

[Icaras]

Thanks for a good laugh, man!

Apple is more likely to deliver a 6-core MP to your doorstep for $1999 (I'm talking about shipping cost here, so don't get excited) than it is to sell one to you at this price.

Can't a poor man just have his Mac Pro already?

Wait, don't answer that.

Anyway, at $1999 doorstep delivery, I should expect Mr. Jobs to hand deliver it with his top hat on.

 

[nanofrog]

Anyway, at $1999 doorstep delivery, I should expect Mr. Jobs to hand deliver it with his top hat on.

Yeah right. I'd think he'd charge you $1999 just to tell you "Piss off".

 

[Nermal]

Anyway, at $1999 doorstep delivery, I should expect Mr. Jobs to hand deliver it with his top hat on.

I seem to recall that one system (TAM?) had an option to be delivered by limo.

 

[DarwinOSX]

Being as PCs already have i3, i5 and i7 laptops, $1000 i7 desktops, USB 3 is starting to show up and they've been Blu-Ray capable for a while now... the next level must be something out of this world.

It's not like the ever innovative Apple to merely play catch-up.

They need to get back to iFundmentals.

i3, i5, and i7 laptops have only been out a matter of weeks for PC's. Except for a few i7's that were essentially laptops that had to stay plugged in all the time and put out huge amounts of heat. Hardly anyone cares about Blu-Ray on PC's but Apple should offer it anyway. $1000 i7 desktop PC's is an area Apple needs to work on. I no longer want an iMac. I want a mid level desktop between the current workstation level Mac Pro and the iMac. Actually I have always wanted that. USB 3.0 is a yawner but is likely to be the new standard at some point. FireWire has lots of room to grow but there has been no hint of anything beyond FW800 and Apple will probably not provide it.

 

[DarwinOSX]

That said, I'd keep it, as I don't expect a price drop on the next system release.

Apple has dropped prices while increasing performance on every generation of Mac Pro. My dual G5 was $3500. Current low end Mac Pro is $2499 retail. I would not be surprised to see that drop at least a few hundred $$ but start with the new six core procs. Intels proc prices have decreased steadily.

 

[Eric S.]

$1000 i7 desktop PC's is an area Apple needs to work on. I no longer want an iMac. I want a mid level desktop between the current workstation level Mac Pro and the iMac. Actually I have always wanted that.

Yes, exactly. I got tired of waiting for something that wasn't coming.

 

[Inconsequential]

Apple has dropped prices while increasing performance on every generation of Mac Pro. My dual G5 was $3500. Current low end Mac Pro is $2499 retail. I would not be surprised to see that drop at least a few hundred $$ but start with the new six core procs. Intels proc prices have decreased steadily.

My bottom end G4 MDD was £1300. This bottom end Mac Pro (with HE discount!) was £1900.

They've gone up more than inflation...

 

[nanofrog]

Apple has dropped prices while increasing performance on every generation of Mac Pro. My dual G5 was $3500. Current low end Mac Pro is $2499 retail. I would not be surprised to see that drop at least a few hundred $$ but start with the new six core procs. Intels proc prices have decreased steadily.

No. The '09's increased prices, and the performance was inverted in some cases.

Take the fact you can get a 3.2GHz '08 Octad for the same $$$ ($3299) as the base 2.26GHz '09 Octad, yet the '08 is faster for both single and multi-threaded applications. Granted, the 3.2GHz is in the refurb store, but the performance difference is notable (reverse), and hasn't been inverted like this before IIRC.

Then look at the Quads in the same model years. The '08's used more expensive CPU's than the '09's (i.e. E5462 was nearly $800USD when they released, while the W3520 is $284USD; parts used in the base models). Prices did NOT fall accordingly, as the '09 Quads actually cost more, not less. Yet the processor is cheaper for the '09.

You're argument may have held true in previous model years, but recent pricing changes ('09 models) and lower CPU performance changes have destroyed the value aspect of the equation.

Xeon's are expensive, and don't typically come down in price. For example, check the prices on X5365's (new), and see what they go for. Now you seriously think Intel's going to give us an extra pair of cores via a die shrink for free (32nm process that still needs to be paid for; and offer the same price and clockspeeds with an extra 2 cores)?

You're crazy!

 

[Inconsequential]

No. The '09's increased prices, and the performance was inverted in some cases.

Take the fact you can get a 3.2GHz '08 Octad for the same $$$ ($3299) as the base 2.26GHz '09 Octad, yet the '08 is faster for both single and multi-threaded applications. Granted, the 3.2GHz is in the refurb store, but the performance difference is notable (reverse), and hasn't been inverted like this before IIRC.

Then look at the Quads in the same model years. The '08's used more expensive CPU's than the '09's (i.e. E5462 was nearly $800USD when they released, while the W3520 is $284USD; parts used in the base models). Prices did NOT fall accordingly, as the '09 Quads actually cost more, not less. Yet the processor is cheaper for the '09.

You're argument may have held true in previous model years, but recent pricing changes ('09 models) and lower CPU performance changes have destroyed the value aspect of the equation.

Xeon's are expensive, and don't typically come down in price. For example, check the prices on X5365's (new), and see what they go for. Now you seriously think Intel's going to give us an extra pair of cores via a die shrink for free (32nm process that still needs to be paid for; and offer the same price and clockspeeds with an extra 2 cores)?

You're crazy!

This man speaketh the truth!

I should have bought a 2008, but I use virtulisation and get a 3 year warranty so thats a no from me

 

[bzollinger]

Yes, exactly. I got tired of waiting for something that wasn't coming.

This is what a lot of "converts" seem to want. As apple gets more people to buy macs they are going to need to address this need. At first someone may just have a laptop or an iPhone. Once they r hooked into the mac camp they don't see any reason they can't get a comparable desktop. When they check the mac store and the entry level machine is $2400 with insufficeint ram among other things they shake their head and buy a PC or sit here and try to send apple the message (like me). BTW I have filled out apples mac pro feedback form...

 

[kudukudu]

I am one of those who was hoping for an enthusiast tower that didn't use Xeons, FB-DIMMS, etc. but I broke down and got the early 2008 mac pro. While I am very happy with my purchase and love the power and expandability, I cannot help but lament what seems to be a lack of attention and focus on computers by Apple.

When I got a G4 15" powerbook back in 2003 this machine was completely cutting edge and had stuff in it that wouldn't appear in comparable PC notebooks for years: FW400, FW800, DVI, USB 2.0, Bluetooth, S-video out, wireless B/G. There is arguably nothing wrong with the current line of macbook pros, but apple notebooks are no longer ahead of the curve in terms of technology and in some cases they are now behind (e.g. Dells with DVI, HDMI, USB 3.0).

If Apple were building laptops today like they were 5 years ago, the latest macbook pros would certainly have HDMI (powerbook had s-video out), USB 3.0, build in 3G, etc.

 

[alphaod]

If Apple were building laptops today like they were 5 years ago, the latest macbook pros would certainly have HDMI (powerbook had s-video out), USB 3.0, build in 3G, etc.

If Apple were building computers like they did 5 years ago, I wouldn't have switched and I'm sure a lot of people I know who switched would not have either.

I know what Steve Jobs was talking about; a Mac Pro tower with the revolutionary Celeron processor!

That's be something; a $3000 Celeron powered Mac Pro.

Hate to be the wet blanket, but when Steve refers to 'new macs' these days, I don't think you can assume he's talking about the Mac Pro. Maybe he is (that would be my hope) but realistically he may actually be referring to the iMac, Mac Mini, hell even laptops.

Probably not the iMac seeing they were just updated.

I'd expect the Mac mini to be updated when the notebooks are… unless of course they'll do it like the 2007 release that didn't get updated until 2 years later.

Can they do dual processor without using Xeon chips?

Yes, switch to Opteron processors.

 

[nanofrog]

When I got a G4 15" powerbook back in 2003 this machine was completely cutting edge and had stuff in it that wouldn't appear in comparable PC notebooks for years: FW400, FW800, DVI, USB 2.0, Bluetooth, S-video out, wireless B/G. There is arguably nothing wrong with the current line of macbook pros, but apple notebooks are no longer ahead of the curve in terms of technology and in some cases they are now behind (e.g. Dells with DVI, HDMI, USB 3.0).

Despite the fact those systems had hardware that was ahead of other vendors, it was still more of a closed system. PPC chips and OS X weren't used by other vendors, and made the systems unique.

Now however, the CPU's are from Intel like everyone else (though other vendors will offer AMD as well), and only the firmware separates the systems from other vendors. So essentially now there's 100% parity in terms of hardware (CPU's, chipsets,...), save Apple's changes to remain proprietary, such as MDP rather than more accepted graphics interface ports (hardware, not other areas such as industrial design = asthetics).

 

[beaker7]

No. The '09's increased prices, and the performance was inverted in some cases.

Take the fact you can get a 3.2GHz '08 Octad for the same $$$ ($3299) as the base 2.26GHz '09 Octad, yet the '08 is faster for both single and multi-threaded applications.

Not always.

From my testing:

2008 Mac Pro 8-core 3.2 Ghz: $4599
Benchwell: 1205

2009 Mac Pro 8-core 2.26 Ghz: $3299
Benchwell: 1698

 

[J the Ninja]

Despite the fact those systems had hardware that was ahead of other vendors, it was still more of a closed system. PPC chips and OS X weren't used by other vendors, and made the systems unique.

Now however, the CPU's are from Intel like everyone else (though other vendors will offer AMD as well), and only the firmware separates the systems from other vendors. So essentially now there's 100% parity in terms of hardware (CPU's, chipsets,...), save Apple's changes to remain proprietary, such as MDP rather than more accepted graphics interface ports (hardware, not other areas such as industrial design = asthetics).

Arguably, MDP is technically superior to anything they could have used, it just makes it a bit of pain in the ass with a lot of displays.

And really, their use of it has helped push along DisplayPort in general.

 

[nanofrog]

Not always.

From my testing:

2008 Mac Pro 8-core 3.2 Ghz: $4599
Benchwell: 1205

2009 Mac Pro 8-core 2.26 Ghz: $3299
Benchwell: 1698

I'm not familiar with that benchmarking program.

My comment is based one compiled results from the forum under Cinebench, which was conveniently made into a chart by another member.

 

[nanofrog]

Arguably, MDP is technically superior to anything they could have used, it just makes it a bit of pain in the ass with a lot of displays.

And really, their use of it has helped push along DisplayPort in general.

I wasn't referring to technical reasons, just the fact they took an existing standard, ripped out audio, and created a different connector no one else was using at that time.

It may become more widely accepted, and if it helps to push DisplayPort, fine. But so far, it's not that common. Save the 24" ACD, I've not spotted any other monitor that supports it natively (no adapters required). Besides, even thier laptops could have used standard DisplayPort if that's the technical standard they wished to use.

But ultimately, it was mentioned to illustrate Apple's desire to have proprietary systems.