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.
MP 7,1 Waiting for Mac Pro 7,1 A1991 (no more)
- Thread starter Mago
- Start date
-
- Tags
- macpro 2016
- Sort by reaction score
I thought I was the only one left from the class of 2008! This is the first time I have seen ancient and MP 3,1 in the same post. This caused me to perform a little research and ancient it is!
How many new Mac Pros were ever sold to hobbyists? It's only because of the large numbers of old used Mac Pros that the hobbyists have been able to afford to buy one. Much of the whining about high prices & limited upgrades for the Mac Pro 6,1 has been from people who were never in the market to buy a new one except at used 3,1/4,1/5,1 prices.
Based on what facts ?
Frankly, that sounds completely made up .
[doublepost=1514198518][/doublepost]
I'm just a one man company, so my budget calculations are fairly simple .
Basically at the end of the year I will get together with my accountant to discuss the fiscally best investment strategy , tax write offs etc..
Apart from that , I buy what I really need, or sometimes I purchase equipment that I could rent but is expected to be paid off by clients within 2-3 years, tops .
After that the gear will make money and/or cover maintenance and possible replacement costs.
Big companies need to use more complex strategies of course, very different budget plans, financing and business models .
To get back on topic ; in my case I still use an MP 3.1, because I had the basic skills to upgrade it to the point that it is still very usable for my workflow (GPU, SSDs, RAM, PCIe cards) .
And of course because one can do it easily with a cMP .
Bummer it's not a 4.1/5.1 , but I might actually get one of those ...
Since the latest Z370 Coffee Lake chipset and 6-core CPU are already supported natively by macOS High Sierra, a Z370 Hackintosh machine seems like a better solution. Not that: a genuine Apple desktop machine with that chipset and CPU wouldn't be preferable, but Apple seems to have thrown any chance of providing that hardware configuration out the window, so to speak.
https://www.tonymacx86.com/threads/...ively-recognized-by-macos-high-sierra.239676/
Interesting concept. Maybe something Apple is thinking about (not at this level, though!).
Yeah. I always wondered why one of the sides of these towers aren’t just a massive head spreader ( with some safety features of course )
Here is another one though it features a bit of poor acsess to io-ports.
Here is another one though it features a bit of poor acsess to io-ports.
Last edited:
Oddly enough I bumped into streamcom cases while looking for minitx case options. The cube made me a giggle a bit.
But really they can't hold a match to this gem of a passive cooling case
I have to admit, I'm having a hard time picturing it in the new space-grey.
But really they can't hold a match to this gem of a passive cooling case
I have to admit, I'm having a hard time picturing it in the new space-grey.
I think a lot of people at Apple had Mac Pros. Though the iMac Pro seems like a good desk machine now for people at Apple, especially when Apple can just order them to max spec and swap them out every few years.
Mac Pros have been popular with freelancers, because freelancers can keep them running forever. Apple probably has a difficult relationship with that but they don’t want to lose that market.
I feel that that market is something they feel can be served with new iMacs, though. At some point it doesn't make financial sense to cater to the people who really want an xMac and are buying used Mac Pros for that purpose. I suppose the argument for it is if you view the used Mac Pro market and pro Macs in general like a city housing market—you sell your expensive "luxury" product, and then its depreciation in value fills the niches below who balk at the $3K+ starting prices.
I will say that if a 2008 Mac Pro is serving your needs fine, then I'm not sure there's any reason besides perceived cost-effectiveness of upgrades that you need a pro Mac, because it's clear you're not suffering from a lack of modern horsepower.
I will say that if a 2008 Mac Pro is serving your needs fine, then I'm not sure there's any reason besides perceived cost-effectiveness of upgrades that you need a pro Mac, because it's clear you're not suffering from a lack of modern horsepower.
That would be a sale for me.
Interesting concept. Maybe something Apple is thinking about (not at this level, though!).
Also, Apple can't let the creation of AR and VR content all be done on Windows, because it's a big part of their future.
If nothing else, AR/VR will serve as the UI of the next evolution of the Digital medium.
Partly there. My thought process was to have the 'source' fan on the case bottom (as you depict), but then have a ... call it a "snorkel" that routes the air to the front side of the case. At this point, its outlet is a "hollow circle" (Dysan Fan design) which jets horizontally through the case - - and because of the 'hollow circle', it has a venturi effect which draws additional (fresh) air into the case from the front grill, which is then carried (also horizontally) through the interior chamber, where it then exits out the back.
And/or put the "hollow circle" on the back to pull air through the case...also horizontally again.
In general, I've learned that the top of PC cabinets is never a place to put anything important - - its simply too easy (tempting) to stack stuff on top. A potential exception here would be an integrated inductive coil to charge an iPhone (maybe a wireless mouse too)...although in all truth, I'd rather have these be done as side pockets (aka "kangaroo pouches") - - location configurable, of course.
Much of the criticism was because Apple isn't an architectural design house, yet allowed themselves to become "too involved" with the details of the building. That diverted them away from their core mission (and core areas of competency).
True, they're not, but by the modern track record of companies who do undertake a "landmark" building isn't all that great. IMO, a big warning sign is when the edifice's cost per square foot is out of line with simpler, more functional spaces.
By any chance would this include Apple employees who live in the area, but because Apple planned poorly, their staff outgrew the building before it was even completed?
And even though I likely will never set foot in it, as a stockholder, I sure as 'heck' have the right to care about how they spend the money that I've effectively loaned to them...case in point: if the building had only cost $1B less ($4B instead of $5B), Apple would have saved enough money to be able to increase everyone's Dividends by +8% for the next two years.
It's possible. I think Apple will keep an eye on how much they sell. iMac Pro is definitely going to put some sort of dent in Mac Pro sales. But because Apple is vertically integrated in the market, they don't want to lose Mac Pro customers.
If they did someday cut the Mac Pro, I'm curious how many people here would suck it up and unhappily buy an iMac Pro, and how many would move to Windows.
If mMP is going to be a regular tower like the cheese grater, I believe Apple will sell it through their developer site for subscribed members only. You wouldn't find it from their store nor advertised on their web site.
But most likely we'll going to see something different, because Apple is more and more like a Disneyland of a tech company; there's a lot of hi-tech involved, but Apple doesn't want the general audience to know how their walled garden works. "It works like magic!" "Where did the computer go?" has been their mottos since SJ returned to Apple and he tossed a plethora of nerdy desktops out from a window to simplify the selection. Since then Macs (and iToys) have looked less and less like the regular computers at the time.
The desire for thinner phones or tablet or iMac is just that. Apple wants to hide the tech, and make it more like "magic". mMP will, as well, try to hide the fact that it is a workstation. But, if it is just a tower, you wont see it sold for general audience at all. Just for the Cast members, or a developer community machine, where Apple magic happens...
But most likely, mMP will follow the path of tcMP, and look nothing like a todays computer.
<Vision>The upcoming display could also have an Apple specialised ARM chip. For Bluetooth, WIFI, airplay, IO-protection and OLED control panel. Next Mac Mini could be just a keyboard that works using airplay with Apple TV or the new display, but it is pluggable as well.</vision)
<s>
There has already been a toaster, cheese grater and a trash can Mac. What next? With dual Xeons and Vega GPUs it could be a Stove Mac. Four hot plates to cook your meal while you work with your Mac? </s>
But most likely we'll going to see something different, because Apple is more and more like a Disneyland of a tech company; there's a lot of hi-tech involved, but Apple doesn't want the general audience to know how their walled garden works. "It works like magic!" "Where did the computer go?" has been their mottos since SJ returned to Apple and he tossed a plethora of nerdy desktops out from a window to simplify the selection. Since then Macs (and iToys) have looked less and less like the regular computers at the time.
The desire for thinner phones or tablet or iMac is just that. Apple wants to hide the tech, and make it more like "magic". mMP will, as well, try to hide the fact that it is a workstation. But, if it is just a tower, you wont see it sold for general audience at all. Just for the Cast members, or a developer community machine, where Apple magic happens...
But most likely, mMP will follow the path of tcMP, and look nothing like a todays computer.
<Vision>The upcoming display could also have an Apple specialised ARM chip. For Bluetooth, WIFI, airplay, IO-protection and OLED control panel. Next Mac Mini could be just a keyboard that works using airplay with Apple TV or the new display, but it is pluggable as well.</vision)
<s>
There has already been a toaster, cheese grater and a trash can Mac. What next? With dual Xeons and Vega GPUs it could be a Stove Mac. Four hot plates to cook your meal while you work with your Mac? </s>
Last edited:
Add to that it's a radically open office layout, at the precise moment in history in which the open office layout is being largely debunked, to the extent that (according to scuttlebutt) the entire silicone design team threatened to quit if they didn't get a normal office space with normal walled offices.
it's a beautiful building, though it runs the risk of being lifelessly bland to the point of looking generic. Compare it to the (possibly will never be built) design for their Federation Square store in Melbourne.
No. That doesn't make any sense. The best way to sell products is to make them non-exclusive. My bet is that Apple will market the Mac Pro to everyone, and try to even get regular non-pro consumers to get it too. The goal of any successful business is to get as many sales as possible. Confuse wants with needs. They'll market the heck out of the new Mac Pro. I personally think that part of the reason it's taking so long to make is because they want to be able to sell a bunch of iMac Pros and Mac Pros. Apple's milking this because they want the Mac Pro to be huuuge.
One would presume it makes more sense to make a high quality product more accessible to the masses because your previous iteration failed to sell as many as the iteration prior to it. I see no point in closing it off to a few hundred people who could afford it and be in a special program at that.
Let's hope so, but it also depends from its price.
If the base model is even more expensive than the iMac Pro, it would be difficult for many people to buy it.
A high starting price would make it inaccessible to the masses for obvious reasons.
The only reason the new Mac PRO will be the same price is if they are all dual CPU systems. Otherwise it should at least be $1000 cheaper because of the lack of screen.
Open office layouts have their place, but it is a very limited one, as they're invariably much noisier than conventional offices (plus they're often used as an excuse to lower office costs by decreasing the number of square feet allocated per employee). The real way to drive collaboration is in having lots & lots & lots of meeting rooms.
And insofar as the rest of the building, the reality of workspaces are that they're always going to be modified to suit after they've been built (again & again), so having extensive curves will primarily incur higher future renovation expenses. Especially when the changes are disruptive to HVAC system balance.
I wasn't aware of Apple proposing a store in Federation Square (just found it on Google)...although from our brief visit to the Square this past fall, my understanding is that anything being proposed for that location is going to garner criticism.
Apple's proposed pagoda-esque appearance, while it is reminiscent of the Apple glass cube, doesn't IMO appear to provide anything even close to be working with the existing architecture (especially the 'shards' style). And while I did only skim quickly, I also don't see anything obvious on materials selection either that showed any effort. All in all, looks like a pretty damn lazy job by Apple where they're trying to develop a glass box derivative that they can cookie-cutter anywhere in the world.