The Next Mac Pro

[ValSalva]

or a funeral may be more appropriate. Then again there is news today about a new 11" macbook air.

So we'll all be ice skating in hell soon. Apple is going to release a netbook before they update the Mac Pro. Holy s***!

Not that there is anything wrong with an 11" MacBook Air. In fact if it is not priced stratospherically I'll probably get one.

 

[deconstruct60]

... Then again there is news today about a new 11" macbook air.

What isn't coming for months probably because some major components ( Sandy Bridge with better GPUs) aren't available yet. There is no ultra low voltage Core i that doesn't have really bad graphics performance yet.

 

[xgman]

What isn't coming for months probably because some major components ( Sandy Bridge with better GPUs) aren't available yet. There is no ultra low voltage Core i that doesn't have really bad graphics performance yet.

Sandy Bridge (MAC PRO SUITABLE VERSION) is mid next year at the earliest even if Intel super ramps up the timetable. The article eluded to mobile and lower end chips up first, so unless Apple is going on a 2 year update cycle . . . (god that would be ugly) . . . . .

 

[slughead]

So we'll all be ice skating in hell soon. Apple is going to release a netbook before they update the Mac Pro. Holy s***!

Not that there is anything wrong with an 11" MacBook Air. In fact if it is not priced stratospherically I'll probably get one.

I can see the ads now: "remember when Jobs said Netbooks were stupid? Well now they're not. Because we said so."

 

[xgman]

I can see the ads now: "remember when Jobs said Netbooks were stupid? Well now they're not. Because we said so."

I just think Jobs needs to take a clue from Bill Gates and just move out of the way and let someone else run things, or better yet, split the company into mobile and mac and let's get back to business.

 

[Cavepainter]

500 days.

I'm celebrating by buying some more ram for my OLD computer. I will not be buying a "new" 2009 Mac Pro.

 

[telequest]

500 days and not even a speed bump

What kills me is that in 500 days Apple hasn't even made an incremental speed bump or feature improvement in the base models. They used to do this on a regular basis, every half year or so. But in 500 days they haven't upgraded the 640GB hard drive? 1 GB RAM modules - 3 x 1GB in the 4-slot Quad and 6 x 1GB in the 8-slot Octo? 1 GB modules are an insult - even the base 4-slot iMac gets 4 GB as 2 x 2GB, leaving 2 free slots for the user to add RAM without having to throw away the originals.

I'm assuming that plenty of component prices have dropped along the way, so that in 500 days Apple could still make the same hefty profit margin as they did on day 1, while offering the customer a bit more competitive value as time went on. They certainly could have done it with RAM and drives. I'm curious about what they could have done with the video card and Xeons along the way.

And as far as Apple skipping the latest series of Xeons to wait for Sandy Bridge, if all they need to do is update a bit of microcode (according to nanofrog) to handle the current ones, that would be another indication they're not serious about this market.

If Apple had made even modest speed bumps and/or feature improvements to the original 2009 since its March '09 release, I'd probably have purchased one earlier this year. But I'm danged if I'll shell out full price for an unimproved '09 – unless of course a new project comes my way that my trusty old G5 can't handle.

Some might call this whining. I call it Apple treating its customers poorly. They can get away with it in the short term when critical software and business practices lock us in to the Mac OS. Longer term, they'll pay the price – assuming they want to stay in this market at all.

 

[mism]

If Apple had made even modest speed bumps and/or feature improvements to the original 2009 since its March '09 release, I'd probably have purchased one earlier this year. But I'm danged if I'll shell out full price for an unimproved '09 – unless of course a new project comes my way that my trusty old G5 can't handle.

Some might call this whining. I call it Apple treating its customers poorly. They can get away with it in the short term when critical software and business practices lock us in to the Mac OS. Longer term, they'll pay the price – assuming they want to stay in this market at all.

+1

If they aren't going to release a new machine in the next week then either improve the current spec, cut the price or at the very least leak something credible. And for god's sake change the web page!

 

[deconstruct60]

What kills me is that in 500 days Apple hasn't even made an incremental speed bump or feature improvement in the base models.

Why bother with minor component updates if folks who need lots more are just going to swap out modules anyway? It is much easier to "throw away" 1GB modules than 2GB ones. Same thing with putting aside a 650GB drive if really want to install some 3-4 TB set up. hey, now have an emergency boot offline back up boot drive.

The facts are the major component that most folks take into account, the CPU, hasn't moved much over the vast majority of those 500 days either.

They used to do this on a regular basis, every half year or so.

When the parts were a higher percentage of the box cost then the price might fluctuate. A $50 change in parts now is only 2% change in price. The Mac Pro goes from 650 to 1 TB ( a delta of what? $30 )... oh now you are going to buy? Don't think so.

If Apple had made even modest speed bumps and/or feature improvements to the original 2009 since its March '09 release, I'd probably have purchased one earlier this year. But I'm danged if I'll shell out full price for an unimproved '09 – unless of course a new project comes my way that my trusty old G5 can't handle.

LOL. You haven't bought a machine in over 4 years and complaining about 6 month deltas on Apple's part. Seriously? So Apple should have dropped 7-8 other models that would not have bought so you will buy this one now.
If the average Mac Pro customers buys a new one every 3-4 years then Apple isn't going to drop new models every 6 months. Makes no sense, the two parties would be on different time scales.

When the processors for the full line up ship then Apple will probably ship the line up. Until then there is a stall. The 8-12 line up could have shipped but most of the price sensitive folks seem to be loudest here so doesn't make that much of a difference. The movement toward a 12 month like refresh cycle has been coming for over 2 years. Not sure why folks act like it is a surprise.

It is not the frequency it is the regularity that matters most to the vast majority of businesses. The regularity is thrown off there in part because of a component update problem. It really isn't worth much of the agnst lost of folks are throwing at it. The current box is way better than any 4-5 year old model. And will be for several years to come.

 

[deconstruct60]

If they aren't going to release a new machine in the next week then either improve the current spec, cut the price or at the very least leak something credible.

Makes zero sense to do a speed bump now and then do a refresh in 4-10 weeks.

Apple is waiting for some parts to become available. It is not like the 3620 and 3640 components shipped and they aren't releasing the line up.

 

[sotiredofsoup]

Sadly, I think AMD has fallen by the waist size also though this might be just hype to get amd owners to go intel..

LOL. That's a very creative new expression you made there.

 

[Roman23]

I take it you build pcs?

If so, then you should know that the same socket is used as in a pc that is on the 2009 single-quad core mac pro.. The only part I see as being non-standard is the heatsink and the hex screws.. other than that, one simply takes off the heatsink, wipes away the old paste, lifts the latch to release the processor and apply new heatsink paste and puts it back into the socket..

Upgrading the processor in the single-quad core mac pro is exactly the same as on a build it yourself pc.. just more time consuming and the parts are more expensive.

Hm...

I'll have to look into that, I had no idea you could replace the processors with an i7 in Mac Pros. I thought you had to buy a special made Xeon if you wanted to upgrade.

 

[nanofrog]

What kills me is that in 500 days Apple hasn't even made an incremental speed bump or feature improvement in the base models.

They did increase the top Quad's (SP model) clock speed (originally 3.2GHz processor, now it's the 3.33GHz part).

Apple is waiting for some parts to become available. It is not like the 3620 and 3640 components shipped and they aren't releasing the line up.

What, you mean you're indicating they're waiting for (3x) Hex core parts for the SP systems (allows for all Hex core offerings in the SP systems)?

You even posted recently that you expect that the the base 2010 SP system would be a Quad, not a Hex core part (of which I agree).

Granted, the LGA2011 parts aren't scheduled until Q3 or Q4 2011 (depending on exact P/N's), but that's an awfully long wait between the '09 and '10 systems. There is some sense to it, but it's also an issue with the DP systems, particularly over cost (i.e. SP systems could cut into DP system sales, especially if the base is an Octad, which is realistic IMO, given the DP Hex core part costs).

 

[Roman23]

How did you get 1600 mhz?

on a 2009 mac pro, if apple has us locked at 1066, or is there a hack for this? I'd sure like to know, as my processor supports 1333mhz and would like to take advantage of that speed.

Or is this a hackintosh/?

Actually, that's how System Profiler is currently reading them - DDR2, not DDR3 - they are OCZ DDR3 OCZ3P1600LV6GK; nor is it reading the 4.1 GHz overclock - It had to be added manually.

 

[mism]

Makes zero sense to do a speed bump now and then do a refresh in 4-10 weeks.

Obviously (to clarify, when I said spec I meant improved RAM or HD in the current machines, not processors swaps. The option to downgrade the default spec could exist for those that want to swap out the parts themselves).

If an update is due in a few weeks a leak or two would have been nice, in order for people to make plans (a leak being the nearest we'll get to a roadmap from Apple). If its two months away then I refer back to my previous post, boost the default spec or cut the price (cue comments of Apple doesn't do that, cue comments listing the things Apple said it would never do but has in fact done).
The current approach is to ignore the issue which from a user point of view is incredibly frustrating and I'd argue from a business point of view is short sighted.

 

[Roman23]

So, the original upgraded chip was a...

w3570... what made apple change to the w3580? No matter, w3570 and all w35xx fit the single-quad mac pro.. you could even use the lowest of the line.. w3505 if you wanted to.. but why would u want to use something with no turbo boost?

They did increase the top Quad's (SP model) clock speed (originally 3.2GHz processor, now it's the 3.33GHz part).


What, you mean you're indicating they're waiting for (3x) Hex core parts for the SP systems (allows for all Hex core offerings in the SP systems)?

You even posted recently that you expect that the the base 2010 SP system would be a Quad, not a Hex core part (of which I agree).

Granted, the LGA2011 parts aren't scheduled until Q3 or Q4 2011 (depending on exact P/N's), but that's an awfully long wait between the '09 and '10 systems. There is some sense to it, but it's also an issue with the DP systems, particularly over cost (i.e. SP systems could cut into DP system sales, especially if the base is an Octad, which is realistic IMO, given the DP Hex core part costs).

 

[nanofrog]

w3570... what made apple change to the w3580? No matter, w3570 and all w35xx fit the single-quad mac pro..

It became available, and was the same price on the published Intel Quantity Price List. Now whether or not Apple got a discount or not, I don't know (expect so, but to a lesser degree than in the past, as I'm thinking they switched to Hon Hai for MP board production as well as system assembly).

But even if they did, I'd expect the W3580 was the same price as the W3570 anyway (same cost regardless).

BTW, the W3505 is a low cost part for a bare minumum workstation system (i.e. only need a dual core processor and ECC memory, which isn't possible on consumer parts at all). Think software that's not yet written (or can't be) for SMP (Symetric Multi-Processing), but still needs ECC protection for accurate results (i.e. recursive operations).

 

[Roman23]

Right..

I was just saying that I am sure you could stick all the w35xx in this single-quad core mac pro and it would all run just fine.. the processors before the w3520 that is.. never tried it, and perhaps because they are so low in price I might experiement and let everyone know that the lower ones do in fact work.. but expect no turbo boost from the w3505, w3510. etc..

Xeon W3503 2400 MHz N/A 2 2 × 256 KB 4 MB 1 × 4.8 GT/s QPI 18× 3 × DDR3-1066 0.8–1.225 V 130 W LGA 1366 March 30, 2009
Xeon W3505 2533 MHz N/A 2 2 × 256 KB 4 MB 1 × 4.8 GT/s QPI 19× 3 × DDR3-1066 0.8–1.225 V 130 W LGA 1366 March 30, 2009
Quad Core
Xeon W3520 SLBEW (D0) 2667 MHz 1/1/1/2 4 4 × 256 KB 8 MB 1 × 4.8 GT/s QPI 20× 3 × DDR3-1066 1.225 V 130 W LGA 1366 March 30, 2009 AT80601000741AB $284
Xeon W3530 SLBKR (D0) 2800 MHz 1/1/1/2 4 4 × 256 KB 8 MB 1 × 4.8 GT/s QPI 21× 3 × DDR3-1066 1.225 V 130 W LGA 1366 AT80601000897AB
Xeon W3540 SLBEX (D0) 2933 MHz 1/1/1/2 4 4 × 256 KB 8 MB 1 × 4.8 GT/s QPI 22× 3 × DDR3-1066 1.225 V 130 W LGA 1366 March 30, 2009 AT80601000921AB $562
Xeon W3550 SLBEY (D0) 3067 MHz 1/1/1/2 4 4 × 256 KB 8 MB 1 × 4.8 GT/s QPI 23× 3 × DDR3-1066 1.225 V 130 W LGA 1366 August 9, 2009 AT80601002112AB $562
Xeon W3565 SLBEV (D0) 3200 MHz 1/1/1/2 4 4 × 256 KB 8 MB 1 × 4.8 GT/s QPI 24× 3 × DDR3-1066 0.80–1.225 V 130 W LGA 1366 November 1, 2009 AT80601002727AB $562
Xeon W3570 SLBES (D0) 3200 MHz 1/1/1/2 4 4 × 256 KB 8 MB 1 × 6.4 GT/s QPI 24× 3 × DDR3-1333 1.225 V 130 W LGA 1366 March 30, 2009 AT80601000918AB $999
Xeon W3580 SLBET (D0) 3333 MHz 1/1/1/2 4 4 × 256 KB 8 MB 1 × 6.4 GT/s QPI 25× 3 × DDR3-1333 1.225 V 130 W LGA 1366 August 9, 2009 AT80601002274AB $999
[edit]

It became available, and was the same price on the published Intel Quantity Price List. Now whether or not Apple got a discount or not, I don't know (expect so, but to a lesser degree than in the past, as I'm thinking they switched to Hon Hai for MP board production as well as system assembly).

But even if they did, I'd expect the W3580 was the same price as the W3570 anyway (same cost regardless).

BTW, the W3505 is a low cost part for a bare minumum workstation system (i.e. only need a dual core processor and ECC memory, which isn't possible on consumer parts at all). Think software that's not yet written (or can't be) for SMP (Symetric Multi-Processing), but still needs ECC protection for accurate results (i.e. recursive operations).

 

[bzollinger]

Makes zero sense to do a speed bump now and then do a refresh in 4-10 weeks.

Apple is waiting for some parts to become available. It is not like the 3620 and 3640 components shipped and they aren't releasing the line up.

In some respects it does make zero sense to do a speed bump. However changing the base components or at least the cost of them makes total sense.

While you stand there justifying and defending Apple's decision to blow off the 2010 Mac Pro buyers, tell me how much sense it makes to charge anyone who wants to add an addtional 1TB drive to the second bay $300!!!

Boom Roasted!

 

[nanofrog]

...tell me how much sense it makes to charge anyone who wants to add an addtional 1TB drive to the second bay $300!!!

Boom Roasted!

Upgrades from other vendors aren't all that cheap either (not as cheap as you'd get the same part yourself and install it). There's labor and warranty support costs added by the vendor (total cost), then a profit margin is applied.

Unfortunately, the margins may be higher for upgrades than that applied to the base system (usually are), and once applied to the cost, generate high prices as a result. And why many paying for it themselves complain, perhaps bitterly.

It all comes back to buyers usually want to keep hold of their money, and vendors want as much of it as they can get. Finding the right compromise is the hard part.

 

[TennisandMusic]

I just think Jobs needs to take a clue from Bill Gates and just move out of the way and let someone else run things, or better yet, split the company into mobile and mac and let's get back to business.

I'm not an MS hater at all (I think they make some great stuff, along with Apple), but if they get someone as bad as Ballmer, no thanks.

 

[mrsir2009]

I reckon Apple has becomed to focused on gimick mobile devices... Apple should be split into two different companies. One for the gimmicky mobile devices and one for the serious computers =)

 

[strausd]

I reckon Apple has becomed to focused on gimick mobile devices... Apple should be split into two different companies. One for the gimmicky mobile devices and one for the serious computers =)

So true. Also, it seems like MacRumors has too. The front page has a countdown just to the little press conference. I though countdowns were only for big things like WWDC, MacWorld, or big media events.

 

[Stirfry2112]

indeed

 

[TheLOGICalone]

+1

If they aren't going to release a new machine in the next week then either improve the current spec, cut the price or at the very least leak something credible. And for god's sake change the web page!

+1,000,000