True, although I think you hardly qualify to criticize a guy who has designed the iMac, aluminum and titanium PowerBook G4, MacBook, unibody MacBook Pro, iPod and iPhone.
Unless you have a few designs you'd like to share with us of course.
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.
The 2009 (Gainestown) Mac Pro: Everything We Know
- Thread starter Tallest Skil
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
True, although I think you hardly qualify to criticize a guy who has designed the iMac, aluminum and titanium PowerBook G4, MacBook, unibody MacBook Pro, iPod and iPhone.
Unless you have a few designs you'd like to share with us of course.
True, although I think you hardly qualify to critisice a guy who has designed the iMac, aluminum and titanium PowerBook G4, MacBook, unibody MacBook Pro, iPod and iPhone.
Unless you have a few designs you'd like to share with us of course.
Yes, Ive is one of the most highly regarded designers in the world in any field who is currently working. Basically, there is virtually no one in the world worthy of criticising his judgement in such a way. Specific disagreements are a different matter
Yes, Ive is one of the most highly regarded designers in the world in any field who is currently working. Basically, there is virtually no one in the world worthy of criticising his judgement in such a way. Specific disagreements are a different matter
I agree...but to use one example of a bad design seems unjust when compared to the many successes. Let's wait and see; if he f*cks up the next Mac Pro or does nothing at all, i'll be in total agreement!!!
There's a different between criticizing his talent and not being in line with his design philosophy. No, I am not a designer, but I know what I want from a computer and that is what I'm buying, not a sculpture. While I like the look of his designs, I do not like the functionality he's been willing to give up of late for just a little bit more thinness. With a computer, the design has to be balanced by the engineering side. With Apple's designs of late, I see Ive making a piece of art and the engineers struggling to put a computer inside of it.
While I agree with you to some extent about the willingness to sacrifice bleeding-edge performance for elegance, or rather, for a balance of features based on design priority, I think this is most applicable to the portables.
To that end, Apple's design philosophy incorporates more goals than just pure aesthetics and pixel-pushing or number-crunching performance. Physical performance has, over time, become a consideration of far greater importance to them as well, by which I mean both physical durability, which admittedly varies, and materials usage. Ergonomics as well, is another factor in certain design choices.
Economic performance, of course, is the overarching goal, and if a thinner, badass-looking metal notebook that's a little too small to hold the newest graphics card will sell more, a thinner aluminum notebook we get. if choosing machined aluminum eliminates 40% of the parts that go into the process, we get machined aluminum. If reducing toxicity in the manufacturing process and getting Green PR is a goal, we get logic boards free of common manufacturing toxins, and we get recyclable body materials. If it's more cost effective for the entire line to be based on those materials, we get a materials-cohesive product line.
All I'm saying is that Apple doesn't make flippant design decisions. Everything is a calculated balancing act to grow the bottom line.
Now, that said, since the introduction of the first G5 PowerMacs, tower design and performance have necessarily been more intimately linked. In order to move beyond the stagnating G4 line from Motorola, Ive and his team were forced to pay incredible attention to case design. The G5 would not have worked in a relatively thrown-together internal setup like the G4 towers (I have the MDD myself).
The process that led them to seven discrete airflow zones with nine low-RPM fans taught them more than a few things about high-performance meticulous design, and also had some nice side effects like quieting the former wind-tunnel designs to barely audible.
All of this is to say, that given the design goals we know they embrace, and the level of detail-oriented design expertise they have gained from the G5s and the transition to Intel (which allowed them to do even more than they could within the limitations of the G5), the exterior of the case may have seen the greater part of its refinement already, while they will likely continue to take advantage of newer hardware to optimize the design of the internals. Lower cooling requirements and greater throughput to more I/O may allow for some interesting changes under the hood.
But I seriously doubt that we'll be seeing any carbon-fiber tesseract-shaped four-dimensional cases any time soon.
Just a hunch
But I seriously doubt that we'll be seeing any carbon-fiber tesseract-shaped four-dimensional cases any time soon.
Just a hunch
The only thing preventing Apple from doing that is the fact that we only have three physical dimensions. Tesseracts are only theoretical because there isn't a fourth physical dimension.
Dimensions:
1. Height
2. Length
3. Depth
4. Time as a direction in a physical plane
5. Probability
6. "three-dimensional" representation of all possible timelines
7. "one-dimensional" representation of all possible timelines in our universe
8. "two-dimensional" representation of all possible timelines in our universe connected to all possible timelines in one other parallel universe
9. "three-dimensional" representation of all possible timelines of all possible universes
10. "one-dimensional" representation of all possible timelines of all possible universes. We stop here, as we can't imagine anything beyond this to which our tenth-dimensional point can be connected.
Oh, and then time as actual time, so eleven dimensions.
But that's string theory, and I don't remember Apple having a Plancktech engineering team... although... those guys from PA Semi might... no, no; that's not right... forget it.
The only thing preventing Apple from doing that is the fact that we only have three physical dimensions. Tesseracts are only theoretical because there isn't a fourth physical dimension.
Dimensions:
1. Height
2. Length
3. Depth
4. Time as a direction in a physical plane
5. Probability
6. "three-dimensional" representation of all possible timelines
7. "one-dimensional" representation of all possible timelines in our universe
8. "two-dimensional" representation of all possible timelines in our universe connected to all possible timelines in one other parallel universe
9. "three-dimensional" representation of all possible timelines of all possible universes
10. "one-dimensional" representation of all possible timelines of all possible universes. We stop here, as we can't imagine anything beyond this to which our tenth-dimensional point can be connected.
Oh, and then time as actual time, so eleven dimensions.
But that's string theory, and I don't remember Apple having a Plancktech engineering team... although... those guys from PA Semi might... no, no; that's not right... forget it.
Spock, izzat you ?
Then somewhere out there (in a parallel universe) Apple releases a way different Mac Pro than you think. It has to happen. Every outcome must happen.
Is that the parallel universe where the xMac is also released?
No, that is in a 3rd universe. But it has a 3Ghz PowerPC G6. (The PowerMac has made it to 4Ghz, but requires liquid Nitrogen cooling)
This is crazy Gainestown has not even been release yet but know intel talking about the next Processor Westmere intels's first 32nm chip, Will this chip be next for the Mac Pro next year?
http://i.gizmodo.com/5150930/intel-big-on-32nm-westmere-processors-for-consumers-in-2010
http://i.gizmodo.com/5150930/intel-big-on-32nm-westmere-processors-for-consumers-in-2010
You're seriously bringing up what's going to come after Gainestown?
Just...no. We don't want to hear it...
Just think about it this way, the new cinema display looks different in contrast to the current 30 and 20 models available. I am very confident the new mac pro will match the black glossy look, similar to the imac, and the mac mini will look like this as well. the 30 in acd will be redesigned to match this, as well as the 20 in.
sooo anyone want to buy my acds?
sooo anyone want to buy my acds?
You're seriously bringing up what's going to come after Gainestown?
Just...no. We don't want to hear it...
I just fine it weird that 45nm Gainestown has not been release yet and they already demoing 32nm Westmere already Intel doesn't waste any time but I am sorry for posting it.
I hope the new 30 inch will look like the new 24 inch and keep the same price as well
If there is a design change to the outside of the Mac Pro - my guess it would be slight. Sure, it hasn't changed in awhile, but it was the rest of the line that was brought up to the MP spec of being aluminum and robust. Thick, rigid aluminum. All business. With the other Macs, the user is intimate with the design - holding it (MacBooks) , or seeing the entire thing (iMac). For the MP, it is not as intimate as the keyboard, mouse, and display. Products in our face need a change more frequently or we tire of them. This is not a pressing issue with the MP tower. Besides, my heart still skips a beat when I see it - after all these years! It reminds me of the high-end audio amps from Krell. Drool.
http://www.krellonline.com/
http://www.krellonline.com/
Sure, it is on the roadmap, but the chances are at this early stage, it will be put back. Then the desktop cpu's might be released, then theres a long wait for the server cpu's to be released - good luck waiting to get one in a mac pro.
If we do end up with an 18 month gap between harpertown and gainestown, there's no reason that wont happen again meaning the next Mac Pro is in 2011 - not early 2010 the quote for desktop westmere.
i hope apple drops the price of their monitors, they need to be more competitive in that market..
from what i understand they use i believe LG components, so im sure if they reduced their margins they would sell more quantitively, and generate more profit. if they sold a 30 in monitor for 1200 or something i would be all over it.
from what i understand they use i believe LG components, so im sure if they reduced their margins they would sell more quantitively, and generate more profit. if they sold a 30 in monitor for 1200 or something i would be all over it.
Apple aren't in the display market though. They just sell them to provide the full solution. They can't compete with Dell anyway.
You mean level 3 parallel universe?
There are 4 levels of parallel universes. 1 is an extension of this space, 2 is this universe in a bubble along other bubbles of universes in a sea of forever-branching universes. Level 3 is same time and space but a different dimension. Level 4 is universes with different laws of physics.
You mean level 3 parallel universe?
There are 4 levels of parallel universes. 1 is an extension of this space, 2 is this universe is a bubble along other bubbles of universes in a sea of forever-branching universes. Level 3 is same time and space but a different dimension. Level 4 is universes with different laws of physics.
He means a level 2.
Okay, I knew this was a bad idea. Until we have anything more to discuss on the Mac Pro, let's move this parallel universe discussion to StringRumors:Forums.
Is that the parallel universe where the xMac is also released?
The xMac workstation was already released in the form of the MacPro. We're looking for the universe where the PowerMac was replaced and not by an iMac.
It looks older now simply because it doesn't match the rest of the line, but, seriously, man, what would they change it to? It'll either be something like what I drew in my first post or something like deze's mockup...
From which I'm having difficulty wrenching myself away...
IMO the MP's case is pretty much visually inline with apples 'latest' offerings.
They are all aluminium with the black, grey or (white light) logo.
Close the MB & MBP and its a chunk of ally with curved edges, look at the MP, its a chunk of ally with curved edges + handles. Take away the screen from the iMac and its a curved chunk of ally. Like some one said earlier in a post, the black is to make the 'screen' aesthetically pleasing. I'm not sure of black panels appearing on the MP as its not a monitor, (although my 3d design shows differently ;-P). Perhaps an introduction of a black logo on either side of the case to match with the new LCD design, and perhaps a slight hint of smoothing on the case (removal of hard edges) I dont see much happening in regards to size and weight as its not a portable device. (They are heavy though
)Anyway that's my two bits
- Status