Perhaps, but all value arguments aside, Apple really does make the nicest looking computers out there, IMO. Even IT buddies that hate Apple otherwise tell me that.
so why hide it under the desk?
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.
Updated Mac Pro Benchmarks and Video of Internals
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Perhaps, but all value arguments aside, Apple really does make the nicest looking computers out there, IMO. Even IT buddies that hate Apple otherwise tell me that.
so why hide it under the desk?
so why hide it under the desk?
...so that you can use the desk as a desk?
And, for what it's worth, the cheese grater box has never done anything for me. Too big, too plain, too many holes.
Anyone willing to provide some advice?
I have been reading this thread and others and am having a hard time deciding which direction to go with the new Mac Pros or something else.
I will soon be buying a avchd camcorder and will want to edit some video...(family only). I am a hobbyist photographer and and work with fairly large RAW files in PS CS3/Bridge. Will probably upgrade to CS5 when it comes out. Besides that I am a fairly average computer user.
I currently have a 1.33 PowerBook G4....yes, it is very slow running CS3 with RAW files.
I need a new computer. I don't need it to be the fastest or the best, but I would like it to be comfortable and enjoyable to use for the above apps.
If I didn't hate the screen or keyboard of the new MacBook Pro...I would probably just buy that despite limitations in RAM and the inability to use multiple HDs etc.
The iMacs are cheap, but RAM is expensive just to get to 8 Gb, with the same limitations of a laptop.
It would be great to have a Mac Pro with the expandability of RAM, multiple HDs for scratch disks, back up, etc.
The upper end of what I want to spend is ~$2500...would rather spend $1500-2000.
That puts me at considering a new 2008 octo 2.8 and a new 2009 quad 2.66 at the upper end.
Are there any opinions between these two configurations given what I would be using it for or is there another option I should consider. I wouldn't mind buying refurbished, but am generally uncomfortable buying used computers.
Thanks for any help anyone can provide.
I have been reading this thread and others and am having a hard time deciding which direction to go with the new Mac Pros or something else.
I will soon be buying a avchd camcorder and will want to edit some video...(family only). I am a hobbyist photographer and and work with fairly large RAW files in PS CS3/Bridge. Will probably upgrade to CS5 when it comes out. Besides that I am a fairly average computer user.
I currently have a 1.33 PowerBook G4....yes, it is very slow running CS3 with RAW files.
I need a new computer. I don't need it to be the fastest or the best, but I would like it to be comfortable and enjoyable to use for the above apps.
If I didn't hate the screen or keyboard of the new MacBook Pro...I would probably just buy that despite limitations in RAM and the inability to use multiple HDs etc.
The iMacs are cheap, but RAM is expensive just to get to 8 Gb, with the same limitations of a laptop.
It would be great to have a Mac Pro with the expandability of RAM, multiple HDs for scratch disks, back up, etc.
The upper end of what I want to spend is ~$2500...would rather spend $1500-2000.
That puts me at considering a new 2008 octo 2.8 and a new 2009 quad 2.66 at the upper end.
Are there any opinions between these two configurations given what I would be using it for or is there another option I should consider. I wouldn't mind buying refurbished, but am generally uncomfortable buying used computers.
Thanks for any help anyone can provide.
Mac Pro would seem like overkill for you
You currently have a single core laptop that supports 1.25 or 2 GiB RAM max - which I assume that you have.
I would think that the 24" Imac at $1500 would be a huge improvement for you, and more than enough horsepower for what you are doing.
The Imac has 2 much faster cores, and 4 GiB of RAM standard. That's far more power, and at least twice as much memory as you now have. (and a faster desktop disk drive)
4 GiB DDR DIMMs are expensive now, but they'll rapidly come down in price - probably by half or more within a year.
If 4 GiB is a real problem, then upgrade to 6 GiB or 8 GiB as the prices fall.
If you can cope with the PowerBook now, the Imac will be a huge improvement - and is $1500 with 24" monitor.
You currently have a single core laptop that supports 1.25 or 2 GiB RAM max - which I assume that you have.
I would think that the 24" Imac at $1500 would be a huge improvement for you, and more than enough horsepower for what you are doing.
The Imac has 2 much faster cores, and 4 GiB of RAM standard. That's far more power, and at least twice as much memory as you now have. (and a faster desktop disk drive)
4 GiB DDR DIMMs are expensive now, but they'll rapidly come down in price - probably by half or more within a year.
If 4 GiB is a real problem, then upgrade to 6 GiB or 8 GiB as the prices fall.
If you can cope with the PowerBook now, the Imac will be a huge improvement - and is $1500 with 24" monitor.
Thanks for the input. No doubt anything will be a big improvement on what I am using now. Right now I am not doing any video, and from what I read this will require a bit more processing power than photos. In addition, because my PB is so slow rendering previews of a folder of say 150 raw images, I find myself not actually sitting down to do as much as would otherwise...so I am not sure I am coping.
You bring up a good point about RAM going down...so I could get to 8 Gb without spending a fortune.
A few things that push me away from looking at an iMac.
I had started to get my heart set on have multiple internal drives for, scratch, apps, files, backup, etc.
I won't really use the screen anyway for photo stuff because I will be using my more calibration and eye friendly matte S-IPS monitor. I would just use the imac screen for toolbars.
I wish there was something in between the iMac and the new Mac Pros....
No one's ever said that before!
</sarcasm>
Where's Apple's Core i7 mini-tower? Come on Tim - Steve's gone, you can give everyone the mini-tower using desktop parts now!
No, but it will very soon as it's currently in testing. Besides, even a regular Core 2 Quad would be impressive when compared to an iMac.
Actually, it is much worse. You're right, there's no community. You are at the mercy of Art Studios Entertainment (bunch of hackers) for updates, fixes, and support. For all we know, they could sell/close their company tomorrow. Apple might be interested.
Edit: They're also unprofessional (just have a look at the website), and sometimes arrogant (forum posts)
For me, the reason why my I used to have my PC desktop on the desktop was because on the floor it was a dust magnet; I'd sooner have it up on the desk where it didn't attract as much dust.
As for the comparison; I see PC users treat their PC tower as if it were some giant phallic symbol they need on display. Its a computer - not a sex aid.
I guess that puts some Mac Pro owners on the same level as the adolescent gamers with their lucite cases and LED fans.
I guess that puts some Mac Pro owners on the same level as the adolescent gamers with their lucite cases and LED fans.
there is NOTHING wrong with having a beefed up computer - just like there is nothing wrong with having a beefed up car, or something similar to that.
We were talking about the PC/MacPro as a phallic/status symbol thrusting from the top of the desk.
...and I've never seen evidence that an LED fan "beefs" up a computer, the benchmarks don't show that.
We were talking about the PC/MacPro as a phallic/status symbol thrusting from the top of the desk.
...and I've never seen evidence that an LED fan "beefs" up a computer, the benchmarks don't show that.
Its just that I've met so many people who claim they need a tower when in reality it is nothing more than a phallic symbol of power sitting on their desktop as a focal point in their office - the 'look at me and my powerful computer! aren't I just the most coolest person!".
How many people do you see claiming they need a tower, dismiss iMac's, claim that the Mac Pro is expensive then purchase a cheap Dell computer - all based in a false requirement? I've seen it so oftern is makes me laugh every time. Then again, there is an idiot born every minute.
We were talking about the PC/MacPro as a phallic/status symbol thrusting from the top of the desk.
...and I've never seen evidence that an LED fan "beefs" up a computer, the benchmarks don't show that.
i meant beefed up as in pimping lol, get with the times- your outa the loop!
How is it a symbol when it sits at home or in the office under a desk ? Unlike a car which people are always showing off, nobody is going to see the desktop computer (or even care about it). People have their own reasons for getting a tower and a symbol is not even on the list.
The problem I had with your statements was that you claimed that the only reason someone would buy a MacPro (other than professionals who buy them to make money) is as a status symbol. You claimed it was an ego purchase.
I never addressed what percentage of buyers actually buy MacPros to make money, just that there are many good reasons to buy a MacPro that have nothing to do with making money or ego.
Why get a tower unless you're going to open and routinely change the internals? You get a tower for one of two reasons; you need the expandability because your work load is going to rapidly increase over the lifetime of the computer thus you want to maximise its life OR you see it as a massive ego boost by owning one.
Again, unless you fit into the first category, why would you need a tower? hence the whole xMac arguments I see are stupid.
During the time I've owned my Power Mac G4 466GHz over its 8 years of life i have kept it running over these years due to minor upgrades when the need arises:
Replaced 466MHz G4 with a 1GHz G4 Sonnet upgrade card
Replaced CD-RW with DVD Combo and later a DVD Burner
Replaced IDE 30GB 5400RPM hard drive with 80GB IDE 7200RPM and later 320GB IDE
Added two SATA 320GB hard drives as RAID, later replaced with two SATA 1TB
Maxed out the 3 RAM slots to 1.5GB.
Added a PCI AlchemyTV DVR card
Added a PCI Sonnet SATA card
Added a PCI 5 port USB 2.0 card
Added an AirPort card
Replaced ATI Rage 128 Pro with ATI Radeon 9800 Pro, which gave it Core Image support and a DVI port.
There are many people who do this and Apple is missing out on this audience. They lost a sale to me because the entry Mac Pro is over priced compared to what I could get from the PC scene and install OS X on it.
Those were the good old times...
Unfortunatly today apart from the choice of 2 or 3 video cards, there are very few real updates that you can perform on a Mac Pro.
Anyway, manufacturers are starting to offer nehalem Xeon workstations, first in line: Lenovo.
Uglyness aside, those will offer dozen of choices of cpus and 7 options of workstation video cards, SATA and SAS drives including 10,000 and 15,000 rpm ones...
By the time you get to anything useful with the Lenovos, they're nowhere near $1500. They start out with 1.86Ghz cpu's, 1GB RAM, NVS series graphics, etc. They'll easily run you as much as a Mac Pro by the time you spec it out similarly. At least that was the case when comparing them to the previous gen MP. Lenovo's pricing and specs have yet to be updated on their site for the new Xeons.
What does make Lenovo (and HP for that matter) attractive is that they sell Core Duo (and presumably will sell regular i7) based workstations for far less, which Apple of course, does not.
- A tower gives many more CTO (buy-time) options than a laptop or a laptop on a stand. Even if you never open it after purchase, you have the flexibility when you buy.
- A mini-tower could use desktop parts, rather than more expensive laptop or workstation/server parts. The price/performance ratio would be better than either laptops or workstations.
- A tower doesn't tie your CPU and monitor together, like a laptop on a stand does.
Sorry, but Ballmer is Satan in disguise. Not to mention that he just repeated once again a tired old quote that's been thrown around by The Other Side since the mid '80s. The different (better) OS aside, the fact remains that Macs and PCs aren't always the "same piece of hardware". Depending on the manufacturer, some PCs use higher-quality components and some use the cheapest Chinese crap. I also love how Microsoft fanboys will say, "Oh it's the same hardware, just more expensive" whenever they're comparing prices, but in other debates, they turn around and say "Apple's build quality is horrible", "all their laptops have overheating issues", "Apple's laptop batteries explode and catch fire", "the MacBook Pros have bad graphics cards," blah blah blah.