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.
New PowerMac (Mac Pro) and MacBook Pro Enclosures
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
ktlx said:Give it up, Aiden. If people haven't gotten through their heads by now, they never will. At this point, I'm convinced that Peace is intentionally being obtuse just to piss you off.
Thats partially true.I do enjoy watching Aiden go at it
Peace said:Thats partially true.I do enjoy watching Aiden go at it
Someone named "Peace" intentionally making people upset.... I need to take a minute to get my head around that.
Peace said:I disagree with the assumption that Intel is wanting to make the new MacPro insides conform to established ideals for the sake of money..
It is in the best interest of Intel to introduce the future of computing with Apple.The initial cost/profit ratio may well be at a loss for a while but Intel and Apple both want to introduce the new MacPro as the best computer in the world.Even if it means losing money until the rest of the computing world catches up and realizes they need to start making better computers.
This is MacRumors..We all have opinions.
Apple is just another customer for Intel. They (Intel) sell more chips to Dell and others. Why would Apple get special treatment? Intel didn't partner with Apple to spend billions on one-off bits and pieces for a single customer. Intel is partnering with Apple to make money.
There are no other chips. Conroe (or a single Woodcrest) will go in a Mac Pro with one chip. Woodcrest will go in a Mac Pro with two chips. Conroe cannot be run in a dual chip configuration. There are no other CPUs out there that Apple can use at the present time. The Mac Pro will run a standard Intel chipset with a run of the mill Intel-designed motherboard with a couple of tweaks to allow it to ensure it's Apple hardware and to allow OS X to run - such as EFI firmware.
Apple may be special to you. In computing terms, it's just another manufacturer, with a tiny market share.
While I already love the design of the Power Mac G5, a new one is always good. I just can't imagine what it will look like... the same goes for the MacBook Pro. They're both already so pretty!
Something I'd like to see is more drive bays like a regular PC ATX case. If you want to had a new CD/DVD drive, just remove the front cover and pop the drive in. No need for a special face plate. I have a beige Power Mac G3 desktop. I installed an Iomega zip drive, but it looks like crap b/c Apple made a special face plate for it, whic I can't even find on eBay. I know, Apple likes being stylish, but do it w/ the rest of the case! Leave the external drive bays alone!
ktlx said:At this point, I'm convinced that Peace is intentionally being obtuse just to piss you off.
... but I was replying to Hector, not Piece...
Glen Quagmire said:
A year ago people said Apple would never use Intel chips.
6 months ago people said Apple would never allow Windows to run on a Mac.
Whats next ?
Topic has strayed waaaaayyyy too far off...
What a bunch of babies in this thread!
"Conroe can't support 2 processors."
"Yes it can!"
"No it can't!
"It'll have to be WoodCrest!"
"Na-Uh"
"Uh-Huh"
"I can't fit a G5 in my *****hole apartment"
"Yes you can"
"No I can't"
"Uh-Huh"
"Na-Uh"
"Poo Poo Head!"
"Na-Uh!"
"Uh-Huh!"
"Yeah well your mom is!"
This has turned pathetic....
What a bunch of babies in this thread!
"Conroe can't support 2 processors."
"Yes it can!"
"No it can't!
"It'll have to be WoodCrest!"
"Na-Uh"
"Uh-Huh"
"I can't fit a G5 in my *****hole apartment"
"Yes you can"
"No I can't"
"Uh-Huh"
"Na-Uh"
"Poo Poo Head!"
"Na-Uh!"
"Uh-Huh!"
"Yeah well your mom is!"
This has turned pathetic....
nagromme said:I vote for no handles (useful but bulky), still minimalist, still aluminum, with a high-gloss faceplate or side-plates in black
Ohh, you can bet that it will have handles. I think that's one of Steve's things. During the G5 launch, he kept saying how Apple was the only company that shipped handles on their computers.
AidenShaw said:
the only current OS that does not support multiple cpu's is windows XP home. anyway when i said SMP i mean on the physical motherboard level, disabled = not enabled, weather the circuitry is lobbed off on the core itself with a laser (this has been done on many cores) or the pins are simply not used thier is no difference.
as for the cores they are the exact same core made on the same silicone disks, likely xeons go in the middle and core2duo's around the edge, even with the p4 xeon some features were disabled on the P4 and some on the xeon, product differentiation makes more money for intel but it costs more to make different physical cores thus they make the same cores which can do everything and lob bits off.
Peace said:
Intel won't be making an Intel chip for Apple. It won't harm or cost Apple more to have Conroe's as well as Woodcrest's. If that is the case, they would most obviously use Woodcrest exclusively for the Mac Pro.
In which case, we may see the Conroe in the iMac.
Unless Intel planned on making one chip for the entire Apple line. We won't be seeing an exclusive chip being produced by Intel. And most assuredly they won't be making an exclusive chip for one product in the Apple line.
They wouldn't do it for Dell, and they wouldn't do it for Apple.
michaeldmartin said:
If im not mistaken, youre going to need woodcrest to do that. Intel doesnt want to design a dual core conroe board, or make their conroe chips MP compatible. Thats what they designed xeon for.
AidenShaw said:
When people talk of "SMP" in this context they are referring to multi-socket setups. And that is something Conroe does NOT do.
It does when the two CPUs are in the same socket.Hector said:
It doesn't support multiple sockets. It's a licensing issue, not a code issue. All versions of XP are SMP-capable, but XP Home only runs SMP with dual-core single socket chips.
That's not how the industry uses the acronym....Hector said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetric_multiprocessing
"The most popular entry-level SMP systems use the x86 instruction set architecture and are based on Intels Xeon, Pentium D and Core Duo processors or AMDs Athlon64 X2 or Opteron 200 series processors."
Glen Quagmire said:
Apple is special to intel now. They are they ONLY major manufacturer to be intel exclusive now. Dell has added AMD to their servers and their desktops in August. Apple is I beleive the 3rd or 4th largest computer manufacturer. When you are that high on the list and you stick with only 1 chip maker you'll have some pull. Why do you thnk Dell was always the first to ship computers with new intel processors why other manufacturers had to wait another week or two if not more. Intel allocated them inventory first. If intel doesn't give apple what they want they can (and probably will, look at IBM) jump ship to AMD and they won't split their product line. Don't be surprised if you don't see intel soc's in ipods in the next few years as well. I'm not saying intel is going to create a special processor for apple just that Apple has some pull in that relationship.
ThinkSecret wishful thinking?
Indeed.
This is what makes me think that ThinkSecret is simply posting "wishful thinking" (wild guesses) rather than industry sources.
I can't see Apple doing a Core 2 Duo/Extreme (Conroe) _and_ a Xeon 5100 (Woodcrest) Mac Pro.... it's got to be Xeon all the way. The G5 was always pitched at the top of the PC workstation market, and I don't see why the
Mac Pro should do otherwise.
No, Apple will release a Xeon 5100 based Mac Pros and XServes (they'll keep that name), and upgrade the iMac to Merom or Conroe. MBP will get the Merom upgrade too.
Just so you know... everything I've stated is pure guess work and wishful thinking ;-)
Mr. DG said:
Indeed.
This is what makes me think that ThinkSecret is simply posting "wishful thinking" (wild guesses) rather than industry sources.
I can't see Apple doing a Core 2 Duo/Extreme (Conroe) _and_ a Xeon 5100 (Woodcrest) Mac Pro.... it's got to be Xeon all the way. The G5 was always pitched at the top of the PC workstation market, and I don't see why the
Mac Pro should do otherwise.
No, Apple will release a Xeon 5100 based Mac Pros and XServes (they'll keep that name), and upgrade the iMac to Merom or Conroe. MBP will get the Merom upgrade too.
Just so you know... everything I've stated is pure guess work and wishful thinking ;-)
1. I hope they will use some of the real estate that the 15 and 17 inch form factors provide to put a full size keyboard on the revised MacBook Pro. I was looking at one two days ago and the pokey little return key was just aweful. Put me right off buying a 17 inch rig.
2. Mac Pro - Case needs to be tall enough to act as a stand for my Mac Mini beside my desk.
3 - Four cores have to be Xeon (Woodcrest) cpus. Even a two core system needs to use Xeon (Woodcrest) to get the faster memory speeds that would set the Pro range apart from the consumer systems when they put Conroes into the iMacs.
2. Mac Pro - Case needs to be tall enough to act as a stand for my Mac Mini beside my desk.
3 - Four cores have to be Xeon (Woodcrest) cpus. Even a two core system needs to use Xeon (Woodcrest) to get the faster memory speeds that would set the Pro range apart from the consumer systems when they put Conroes into the iMacs.
My vote is for bigger is better
I hope the new Mac Pro is MUCH larger. The one reason why I didn't upgrade my Dual G4 to a Dual G5 is that it would've been a downgrade in some aspects. It would've been only slightly faster, but only one DVD burner and 2 hard drives as opposed to 2 DVD burners and 4 hard drives.
I could understand having a mini-tower configuration for those of you who want more than a mini but have space constraints, but it really sucks for some of us who need the extra capacity.
I'd also really like to see it in a drive/sled set up so replacing drives can be done really easily (ideally without powering down).
Needless to say, I have a lot of Pr0n.
I hope the new Mac Pro is MUCH larger. The one reason why I didn't upgrade my Dual G4 to a Dual G5 is that it would've been a downgrade in some aspects. It would've been only slightly faster, but only one DVD burner and 2 hard drives as opposed to 2 DVD burners and 4 hard drives.
I could understand having a mini-tower configuration for those of you who want more than a mini but have space constraints, but it really sucks for some of us who need the extra capacity.
I'd also really like to see it in a drive/sled set up so replacing drives can be done really easily (ideally without powering down).
Needless to say, I have a lot of Pr0n.
AidenShaw said:
I'm sorry I forced you and others to be so confused by my blindingly obvious use of the terminology.
heck while making the post i made a mental note of "well single dual core cpu's do use smp in the silicon, well i guess that does not count in this context and people will see through it"
the point is for a quad you need woodcrest it cant be done with conroe which has been said about a billion times in this thread.
AidenShaw said:
Words evolve. When people talk of "SMP", they are talking about two processors. It just happens that processors these days have two (or more) cores in them, but the number of physical CPU's might still be just one. Whereas in the past you needed two physical CPU's to have two processing-cores, but these days you get it with just one CPU. But I don't really see people call their machines "SMP-machines" if they just have one multicore-CPU.
And BTW: take a chill-pill.