Nvidia works for Apple under contract. It was Apple's fault, they never specified they wanted backwards compatibility with EFI32 (take this for what it is worth but I am not speculating on this). It isn't Nvidia's job to ask for this backwards compatibility anyway, Apple could be developing EFI64 for the old MacPro's for all they know. I was surprised a known Nvidia employee commented on this publicly at all and he may very well have been reprimanded for doing so. I am not saying Apple intentionally didn't want backward compatibility or was careless and didn't consider it but all you have to know is Apple as the entity who demands secrecy of Nvidia could clear this up in an instant. Nvidia is not generally allowed to make public statements about their work for Apple. Think of it this way; if Apple has complete control over the flow of information and it made them look like the ones who were not at fault you think Apple would not blame them publicly?
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.
Upgrading old Mac Pro to 8800 GT graphics?
- Thread starter Fezzy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nvidia works for Apple under contract. It was Apple's fault, they never specified they wanted backwards compatibility with EFI32 (take this for what it is worth but I am not speculating on this). It isn't Nvidia's job to ask for this backwards compatibility anyway, Apple could be developing EFI64 for the old MacPro's for all they know. I was surprised a known Nvidia employee commented on this publicly at all and he may very well have been reprimanded for doing so. I am not saying Apple intentionally didn't want backward compatibility or was careless and didn't consider it but all you have to know is Apple as the entity who demands secrecy of Nvidia could clear this up in an instant. Nvidia is not generally allowed to make public statements about their work for Apple. Think of it this way; if Apple has complete control over the flow of information and it made them look like the ones who were not at fault you think Apple would not blame them publicly?
[G5]Hydra;5015392 said:
Ha ha! This is turning into the conspiracy theory of the year! I have no idea where you are getting your "non"-speculation from, but seeing as you are refusing to enlighten us, I'm going to take it with a pinch of salt. It was Nvidia's PR Director, as in the person who decides what the public will hear. I very much doubt that he would reprimand himself.
Secondly, why would Apple specify EFI64/32 compatibility to ATI, and fail to do the same with Nvidia. That makes no sense at all.
Cheers!
ATi occasionally sells their own cards for Apple computers, they most definitely would care about all types of compatibility issues. Apple at one point released an update for the 1900 which uses EBC EFI which will work in either environment, it is actually different that using just EFI64 or EFI32. This is why one of those older non-updated 1900's won't work in a new MP but will if updated. If ATI wants to sell cards in the future for older Mac Pro's the widest possible distribution would be advantageous for a market which is small to begin with. Nvidia doesn't make and sell cards they only make the chips, drivers and reference designs. They are much more like pure OEM for Apple than ATi is. Nvidia just does what Apple contracts them to do.
Also you are sadly mistaken if you think a PR director doesn't have to answer to anyone. The one thing to keep in mind is that if someone tells you a story who works in company A that works with company B no matter how much you trust worker A you are only getting one side of the story. I'm sure there are two sides but all you have to look at is the fact that Apple pays Nvidia to do work for them not the other way around.
[G5]Hydra;5015541 said:
I don't see the relevance of this, The 2600 is a low end OEM card highly unlikely to be marketed by ATI directly to Mac users as an upgrade (via Apple for multiple card use, yes). The fact that the 2600 card has EFI on it means that it was specified by Apple. They chose the card, they set the specs and the memory speed and their traditional under-clocking etc..
[G5]Hydra;5015541 said:
A director of public relations in any company is the person with ultimate responsibility for deciding what the public does and doesn't hear. This is not an issue of Earth shattering proportions, heads are unlikely to roll. There was a problem, they announced a fix. I don't think it's more complex than that.
I'm not sure I follow your Company A, Company B theory, but you seem to be implying that Apple is blaming Nvidia for the problem that they themselves are responsible for (correct me if I'm wrong here). But if that's the case, Apple hasn't actually blamed anyone. Or perhaps you are implying that it's Apple's fault, but because they are the contracting party they have the power to force Nvidia to apologize for something they didn't do? If so, thats a bit far-fetched.
Cheers!
You aren't seeing the difference between Nvidia and ATi WRT Apple. While Ati and Nvidia work in similar capacity to each other for Apple ATi actually makes the card for Apple like they make cards for retail. This affords ATi a little more leeway than Nvidia has. Even if Apple didn't specify they wanted EFI32 compatibility ATi makes those cards and would like to sell more of them regardless. Apple has cards made from Nvidia reference designs so if Apple was to take an Nvidia reference design and have it made with say less than a generous amount of ROM on it Nvidia can't do anything about it.
As to the director of public relations I don't think anyone wants to piss the Steve off. My point about the blame game is simple. If you make a mistake by omission or intentional and you control the flow of information you can either tell the truth and take the blame or you can lie and blame the other party. If you lie the other party is not going to be happy about it and the truth may come out and be even more embarrassing. If you are the other party and not allowed to release information it does you no good to lie because the other party can call you on the carpet for doing so but even if you tell the truth you are going to be called on the carpet. Silence by Apple in this case speaks volumes. If it was Nvidia's fault I don't see Apple having any problem blaming them in some statement.
As to the director of public relations I don't think anyone wants to piss the Steve off. My point about the blame game is simple. If you make a mistake by omission or intentional and you control the flow of information you can either tell the truth and take the blame or you can lie and blame the other party. If you lie the other party is not going to be happy about it and the truth may come out and be even more embarrassing. If you are the other party and not allowed to release information it does you no good to lie because the other party can call you on the carpet for doing so but even if you tell the truth you are going to be called on the carpet. Silence by Apple in this case speaks volumes. If it was Nvidia's fault I don't see Apple having any problem blaming them in some statement.
[G5]Hydra;5015721 said:
I'm quite aware of the difference between ATi and Nvidia WRT Apple. ATI will not be selling the 2600 XT directly. The Apple version was specified by Apple. Why else do you think it comes underclocked?
Secondly, Nvidia Reference designs always have generous ROM Size. It's third party manufacturers that downsize it later to save money. Because Apple contracts with them to develop and provide video cards, they give the design to companies such as ASUS to manufacture them. But it's Nvidia that Apple contracts with. Somewhere along the line the specs for EFI32 were dropped. The only evidence we have points to Nvidia being responsible. They might not be, but there is no evidence at all at the moment that shows otherwise.
Apple does not make a habit of blaming anyone for anything. They always like to keep their inter-company dealings behind closed doors.
As I said before, despite all the angst expressed here about it, it's not a big deal. As far as Apple is concerned, the problem is being dealt with by Nvidia. Why on earth would Apple come out and make a public statement berating a business partner for an error that they are correcting? What possible purpose would it serve in the big scheme of things?
That would be a pretty adolescent way of running a company.
I think some people here have a completely distorted view of reality, caused by obsession with small problems that affect them and assuming that they have enormous import to the rest of the world. It ain't so.
Cheers!
It is underclocked to reach a desired power and or thermal envelope to be able to run up to 4 in one computer. Changing the clocks is something you or I could do so I'm not sure what a big deal that is. When Apple contracts with ATi it is to get a card that is already on the shelf so to speak.
I don't see any evidence publicly released that indicates it is Apple or Nvidia's fault. I think the lack of evidence is more telling. You honestly think Apple told Nvidia to make the card EFI32 compatible and they just forgot? It seems far more likely in the absence of direct evidence that Apple never specced EFI32. ATi going with EBC EFI negated the problem for them, but it looks like they came upon that solution on their own because if Nvidia had done the same we wouldn't be in this thread right now. The thing to keep in mind is ATi is used to offering a whole solution deal for Apple whereas Nvidia is contracted for drivers and their reference designs. Compatibility is generally something ATI considers will all its desktop products, Nvidia on the other hand is used to just doing what Apple tells them to do. If EFI32 was not specified they just may have ignored it. You could argue that that was Nvidia's fault and they could have brought this up with Apple if they saw this as an issue with backwards compatibility but who knows about that.
I agree it isn't a huge issue, I don't have a dog in this fight, it really doesn't affect all that many people to begin with. The only public statement we have is from the PR guy at Nvidia and it doesn't tell us anything more than they are working on a solution.
[G5]Hydra;5016868 said:
Why it's unclocked is obvious and also irrelevant to the issue. The fact is, compared to the PC version which you can also run multiples of in any PC, it come underclocked, and that was obviously at Apple's bidding. The fact that you or I can change it easily is also completely irrelevant.
[G5]Hydra;5016868 said:
Someone screwed up obviously, but I really don't understand why you're sure it was Apple and not Nvidia with absolutely no proof whatsoever. I'm not saying it didn't happen, just that the only meagre evidence we have points in the other direction. You are, however, announcing categorically that it was Apple with no proof AT ALL. To me, that's a leap of faith. Do I honestly believe Nvidia could screw up? Yes, as could Apple, as could any enterprise run by human beings, unfortunately.
[G5]Hydra;5016868 said:
Finally, a paragraph we can almost agree on. Almost. Personally I can't see any reason on Earth why Nvidia's Director of PR would rush out a response to a f**ck-up if the company wasn't directly responsible. It makes no sense whatsoever if the problem came from another source.
I guess we'll have to agree to differ on this issue until something more concrete comes along that might contribute more information.
I think we've said about as much as we can here, and I'm sure people are getting pretty bored with it. I know I am, so I'm going to shut up for a while until we do get some new information. I am, however looking forward to getting my hands on an 8800GT.
Cheers!
Back to basics. When I purchased my Mac Pro 6 months ago someone in the shop told me that new graphics cards would become available - OK I may have been stupid believing him but I did. My gut feeling is that Apple new exactly what they where doing when they brought out the the new MP with the new card not compatible with the 'old' MP. Don't tell me not to get angry!@
I didn't tell you not to get angry, I said getting angry about something that is pure speculation is silly. And it is. But if you like getting angry at unfounded suppositions based on no evidence except for "gut feelings", go for it!
Cheers!
There is no 'suppositions' about the fact that apple brought out a graphics card that isn't compatible with my 6 months old Mac Pro. Neither apple or Nvidia have made any official announcement that they have any intention of rectifying the situation. All fact - no 'speculation'!!
Yawn. You believe what you want. If you want to spend your life having tantrums about every crime that you imagine Apple commits, you go right ahead. I've got better things to do.
People are catching on..
Apple does not make PCs. It makes consoles like Nintendo, Xbox, or PS3. Its a very old model from the earliest days of home computing when boxes like the C64 and Texas Instrument cartridge machines first came out. This explains many things about the evolution of the company's various products such as the mac mini and the imac. They are not so groundbreaking when you realize its the natural progression of their business model to create solid state boxes that trade in upgradability for sleekness. It explains why Apple does not put out a mini-tower. It also explains why Apple will not create an 8800 card for the old Mac Pros any time soon..it runs against its business model of console selling. We will only see this, if ever, when the computer itself is so outdated that updating the graphics card will not take away their console sales in either the new Mac Pros or the Imacs. Its also the reason Apple needs to frequently present new updated product lines and maintain strong customer service.
After using Mac notebooks for years and finally buying a desktop Mac Pro last year, I realize its just foolish to buy Mac desktops...whether an Imac or a Mac Pro. There is no upgrade path despite what anyone might say. Its actually borderline consumer fraud in my opinion the way they market the Mac Pro.
Yes, the operating system is better than Windows but ultimately its not worth the sacrifice in compatibility for new components.
And finally, no - I dont believe an 8800 will be made available for old Mac Pros anytime soon.
Apple does not make PCs. It makes consoles like Nintendo, Xbox, or PS3. Its a very old model from the earliest days of home computing when boxes like the C64 and Texas Instrument cartridge machines first came out. This explains many things about the evolution of the company's various products such as the mac mini and the imac. They are not so groundbreaking when you realize its the natural progression of their business model to create solid state boxes that trade in upgradability for sleekness. It explains why Apple does not put out a mini-tower. It also explains why Apple will not create an 8800 card for the old Mac Pros any time soon..it runs against its business model of console selling. We will only see this, if ever, when the computer itself is so outdated that updating the graphics card will not take away their console sales in either the new Mac Pros or the Imacs. Its also the reason Apple needs to frequently present new updated product lines and maintain strong customer service.
After using Mac notebooks for years and finally buying a desktop Mac Pro last year, I realize its just foolish to buy Mac desktops...whether an Imac or a Mac Pro. There is no upgrade path despite what anyone might say. Its actually borderline consumer fraud in my opinion the way they market the Mac Pro.
Yes, the operating system is better than Windows but ultimately its not worth the sacrifice in compatibility for new components.
And finally, no - I dont believe an 8800 will be made available for old Mac Pros anytime soon.
So when Steve Jobs told me this on Feb. 9th he was lying?
"nVidia is engineering this card, which we will distribute. They are not done yet.
Steve"
The sad thing is that this is the closest to an official comment I have seen on the issue, and it is sitting in my inbox, not on Apple's site.
This is why I am so cynical other than the obvious reasons for Apple not to do this.
1. Really, how hard is it to make this card compatible considering one already exists for the new Mac Pro? Does it really take months?
2. Is it really plausible that they forgot to make this backwards compatible? ATI has done it with the 2600. Its been well established there are no hardware issues. In fact, it sounds like they had to go out of their way to make the card not work on the old Mac Pro.
3. After all this. No official statement from Apple. That email actually tells you more in what it doesnt say than what it does say. It doesnt say if anything will actually be delivered. It doesnt give any kind of timing.
4. It worked. After a month of this thread being the most active, it has died down considerably. No articles, no press..nothing. Apple can basically sit on this for the next six months while the old Mac Pro user group gets absorbed into the new Mac Pro group or switches to Windows/Linux.
Bummer that they haven't released the card yet, but the fact of the matter is that aside from gaming the X1900XT is still good enough for anything you'd be doing - if you were rendering fine with it before since when did the few seconds or minutes you'd gain with the new card become absolutely necessary?
Apple should have fixed this already - actually it should never have been an issue. But some people around here are being a bit over the top with the rage IMHO.
I'm still humming along with my 1.4GHz PowerMac G4, so I don't feel bad for you anyhow.
Apple should have fixed this already - actually it should never have been an issue. But some people around here are being a bit over the top with the rage IMHO.
I'm still humming along with my 1.4GHz PowerMac G4, so I don't feel bad for you anyhow.
Nicely said. I'm *extremely* disappointed and pissed off about the whole 8800 incompatibility. So much so, that my next computer very well may be a hackintosh.
Apple sold well over 2 million Macs in Q1 2008...even if every person who signed that petition sold their Mac tomorrow and built a Hackintosh or bought a Dell, it would have a negligible effect on Apple's sales, income and overall behavior. I'm not happy about it, but I'm a fatalist when it comes to Apple and video cards anymore - they don't get it and never will.
Nobody at Apple or Nvidia did anything when G5 tower owners complained that they couldn't buy the GeForce 7800GT as a kit, leaving everyone with the GeForce 6600 cards out in the cold. The issue persisted for 13 months until ATI stepped in with the X1900 G5 Edition - 3 months after the Mac Pro replaced the G5s...Apple probably doesn't expect things to be any different with the current situation. Nvidia knows about the issue and I'll bet as far as Apple is concerned they can fix it in their own time...or not.
To be fair in response to complaints that Apple's cards are always outdated; it's a true statement in the basic sense but less than one in a thousand computer users actually needs to buy a new video card every time a new high-end model shows up, and 99% of computer users probably don't even need all the power that Radeon X1900XT provides. Should Apple update their GPUs more often? Absolutely. But the video card market has some of the worst planned obsolesence of any product out there, and if you base your needs on what's "current" you're just buying into the hype and encouraging video game manufacturers to put out games with increasingly steep requirements.