you know this to be true or are you just guessing and repeating what others have said?
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.
Steve Jobs Once Considered Killing Apple's Pro Products
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
you know this to be true or are you just guessing and repeating what others have said?
Perhaps you should go back and re-read the conversation, I wasn't arguing against what was theoretically possible- a human travelling faster than the speed of light is theoretically possible! I was arguing that a specific product was vapourware - and you then said because of some non-committal blurb on a website it wasn't!..
People are being correct in using the company supplied "Mac Pro" name, but the argument really is centered around a tower by whatever name. "Pro" does not necessarily mean "Professional" in the electronics business any more and, I think, this is where a lot of people get hung up on the naming bit. If someone, for whatever reason wants "more" than an iMac the only remaining option in the Apple ecosystem is the Mac Pro. It does not mean that non-professional users who want "more" are not potential customers.
It certainly does look as though Apple is serving notice to Mac Pro users that the company has moved away from the expandability of a tower. I suppose that it is fair notice to make an orderly transition to whatever suits their needs if the new product does not suit their needs/desires. Tim mentioned the next decade when introducing the new model. I think it reasonable to conclude that this is the format of the "Mac Pro" for a long time to come.
Personally, I just don't like iMacs, but I may have to learn to or be forced into using something else. It is a pity that Apple expends so much effort on "industrial design" for a product that most of the time goes under the desk anyway.
To me, it looks like CPUs and graphics cards are also on sockets. But the vast majority of parts are soldered on all computers.
It was shown in the presentation. You did watch the presentation, didn't you?
And by the way, EVERYBODY is "repeating what others have said" because no one has purchased a shipping retail product to put their own Mark I eyeballs on it. That includes you.
Out!
yeah, I watched it. twice actually. it's just that I don't recall seeing or hearing anything about the ability to easily remove the shell is so users can replace ram. (actually, I don't recall hearing/seeing anything about user serviceable ram)..
I also saw/heard nothing about the gpu/cpu being welded on (which would basically imply if one of your gpus blow, you gotta buy an entirely new computer if you want to continue working)
----------
i guess there are two possible outcomes to this.
1- is you're wrong and when it's revealed that the computer is actually serviceable beyond replacing/upgrading ram, you (you meaning at least a thousand members around here spewing how lame this locked down computer is) will casually forget about all the bs they've been saying and find something else to complain about instead..
2- is you're right and i (and a hundred thousand other 'average mac pro users') will not buy it when we otherwise would have.. because for real- there's no way i'm going to spend 3-4000 on something which says i have to spend another 3-4000 if a $300 part breaks.
Not that is changes your overall point. But that list is from 2010, and doesn't include Apple's NC data center which would be #8 on that list at just over 500k sqft. The original site plans (posted to the local government website if I recall) also showed a second mirrored facility on the same site, before it eventually became their massive solar field.
Again, all speculation, but it does look like the internals will be accessible based upon what we've seen and the lock switch shown. I would guess that the only user upgradeable part will be RAM. The GPUs don't look to be soldered on, however I don't foresee replacement parts/upgrade options being readily available to the public.
You are correct. And I said the same thing. Pixar like what the new MP can do. The looks are just a bonus.
thing is @aiden, why does that matter? i don't think apple is pretending to be that type of solution -or- if they were, how would it benefit me and people like me in any sort of way regarding our computing needs? i sort of feel as if apple was in the market of giant mainframes (or whatever) then my needs would be less of a concern and i'd probably be shopping elsewhere.
all i (and honestly- most creative pros out there) need is a souped up personal computer.. and i also feel apple is targeting that market exactly with their pro line.. i mean, that's basically why i use apple computers in the first place.. i'm their target and their products suit my needs.
if i were computer shopping for my 50,000 employee global corp which generates and shares gazillionbytes of data etc.. sure, i'd more likely than not be looking for solutions other than giving everyone macs which hook up to mac mini servers.. you know?
Nah, its the base for a Dyson fan... after all that is where they put the true fan
I was responding to a comment by globalhemp, and I was agreeing with you - Apple doesn't need to do the whole thing....
You're kinda missing the point, which is that the current MacPro allows expansion in a neat'n'tidy way (i.e. internally) which the new version eschews. It doesn't really matter whether /you/ like thunderbolt or others don't. It doesn't really matter that /you/ have a way around it. The point is that anything other than internal storage is going to add some level of complexity. You might be OK with that, and I'm not as bothered about it as you might think (or as I might have suggested). The simple fact is that the new Apple MacPro does complicate things more than the older version. This is not a step forward. It might not be a major step back (for some), but it's still not a step forward.
Having said all that, if I could justify one of those things I would. I'd just have to add the cost (and desk space) of an external housing for the extra disks!
EDIT: And G-Tech are just gonna hate anything that's not the cheesegrater!
The simple fact is that the new Apple MacPro does complicate things more than the older version. This is not a step forward. It might not be a major step back (for some), but it's still not a step forward.
It complicates things for some users, and makes it easier for others. You find it "nicer" to open up your computer and hide components inside of it. Other users would rather not open up their computer, but would rather daisy chain them off a lightning connector. It might be that these people are less comfortable opening up their computer, or they hot-swap the majority of their drives with some frequency, or perhaps they even have some noisy high RPM drives they they like to have at an increased distance from their main workstation. Since I'm not even one of those types of users, there are probably more use cases that I can't not come up with. Suffice it to say, I don't think you can say with certainty for all users that "this is not a step forward". I don't even think you can say that your use case is better than the others, unless you have some data, even shady data, that suggests otherwise.
The ioFX is 1.4 GB/sec, Apple says 1.25 GB/sec - so the ioFX is somewhat faster.
Is the Apple drive 1.6 TB in capacity?
For other workstations, "large" is usually "more than 4 to 6". For the MMP, "large" is "2".
shocking...good thing he didn't do that, what would i do without the pro line, not killing the pro line further proves that SJ was a great leader, probably the best.Yeah I know, but it's the same ballpark, first because these are not benchmark results, secondly because if you are running into a bottleneck at 1.25GB/s, getting 150MB/s more for $5.500 will probably not be enough to solve your problem. Regarding what sizes Apple will offer, I have no idea.
Sure, but that's not what I objected against, but that external drives where inferior per se, even though it's the default in the most demanding pro applications concerned with either large space, speed or many users.
My original response was to your following quote:
My statement was, this is irrelevant. Pixar (or any other sane company) will NEVER pic a computer, on which they do any portion of their work, based on physical looks.
Also, apparently they don't even use Apple machines/products (not the same products available to us, anyway) (in a large scale, anyway) to get the job done. It's actually pretty tough, it would seem, to find good information, but as far as I can tell, basically everything they use is custom built. This is NOT to say that Apple has nothing to do with them on a software/hardware level, but it is unlikely they will be using MacPros for much of their work, because they dimply aren't powerful enough. Some of the stats I am reading is that their custom machines run upwards of $200,000 and they generally have eight or more at a time.
http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft...teve-jobs-pixar-uses-microsoft-windows-azure/
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...puter+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=safari
Last edited:
You're kinda missing the point, which is that the current MacPro allows expansion in a neat'n'tidy way (i.e. internally) which the new version eschews. It doesn't really matter whether /you/ like thunderbolt or others don't. It doesn't really matter that /you/ have a way around it. The point is that anything other than internal storage is going to add some level of complexity. You might be OK with that, and I'm not as bothered about it as you might think (or as I might have suggested). The simple fact is that the new Apple MacPro does complicate things more than the older version. This is not a step forward. It might not be a major step back (for some), but it's still not a step forward.
Having said all that, if I could justify one of those things I would. I'd just have to add the cost (and desk space) of an external housing for the extra disks!
EDIT: And G-Tech are just gonna hate anything that's not the cheesegrater!
no he's not he's been arguing the same thing since WWDC