Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

What were they thinking?

nick9191 said:
Dual Link DVI? Yes I guess there should be two, but Apple have always mercilessly dropped older tech since they started, if you don't like it don't buy Apple, or at least expect it.
Click to expand...

There are too many people with brooms stuck up their butts today (not you). Where is the problem???

Mini DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI Adapter
Use the Mini DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI to connect to a 30-inch display, such as a 30-inch Apple Cinema Display HD, and enjoy the ultimate widescreen canvas with a resolution of 2560 by 1600 pixels.
Click to expand...

Connecting two 30-inch Apple Cinema HD Displays requires a Mini DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI Video Adapter.
Click to expand...

Thats 2 dual link DVI ports right there... And people call themselves professionals, sigh.

I'll be laughing with a nice 4 core 2.93 and 4870. 3 gigs of RAM, plenty for me. I have 3 right now and I never have a single pageout anyway.
 
Macpropro80 said:
I believe steve wouldn't have let the graphic card go through without dual DVI. Did we already go through this with the G5's and proprietary graphic ports?
Click to expand...

I believe i read that the display port can be converted to dvi just fine with an adaptor so I dont see whats the big deal here, plus i do not think displayport and mini display port are only apple graphics ports just apple has adopted them before they become the standard. Additionally if the difference between harpertowns and gainestowns is anything like the difference between last gen quad and i7 then this machine (the lowest dual) should be about as fast if not faster then a dual 3.2 from last gen (I've used a couple of these on pc's my friends have (quad core and i7 920) and the difference in speed on i7 was very evident). I seriously do not get what all the whining about price is about for this computer you are gettin new tech on the processor end that significantly changes and speeds up the way your mac pro performs its not like its a slight speed bump or somethin that costs more for same performance compared to the last gen this IS faster and will work better... all that said i am disapointed that i dont see a more powerful graphics card for midrange (just under a workstation which isnt here either...) otherwise this update is pretty good. Sure i am gonna spend 1500 more for this then i was about to (was about to pull the trigger on a 3.2ghz prev gen refurbished 8800gt) but i believe it will be worth it.
 
How about a ACD Plug and a Mini-Display plug? With no DVI.

That would be nice way for Apple to screw us.
 
Let's all just be content that they didn't remove FW altogether.

And as far I can tell, if you use 8GB of RAM you lose the triple channel performance (And there is no dual channel).

Abidubi said:
DVI ports right there... And people call themselves professionals, sigh.
Click to expand...

That's a $99 adapter that may or may not work.
 
Abidubi said:
There are too many people with brooms stuck up their butts today (not you). Where is the problem???
Click to expand...
And that would be great except:

1. It costs $99.
2. The damn thing is incompatible with half the displays out there, even Apple's own cinema displays.
 
alphaod said:
Let's all just be content that they didn't remove FW altogether.

And as far I can tell, if you use 8GB of RAM you lose the triple channel performance (And there is no dual channel).



That's a $99 adapter that may or may not work.
Click to expand...

May or may not work? Your joking right? Ha, you almost got me there. I thought you were serious.
 
alphaod said:
Let's all just be content that they didn't remove FW altogether.

And as far I can tell, if you use 8GB of RAM you lose the triple channel performance (And there is no dual channel).



That's a $99 adapter that may or may not work.
Click to expand...

im very sure there is dual channel when tri channel isnt used dual channel is enabled
 
Abidubi said:
May or may not work? Your joking right? Ha, you almost got me there. I thought you were serious.
Click to expand...

yea ur right unless ur an idiot and buy the wrong adaptor (or dont know how to use an adaptor) it will work .... i read about this on apples site somethin about a lotta people buying the WRONG ADAPTOR and then complainin (in the reviews for products)
 
KBS756 said:
yea ur right unless ur an idiot and buy the wrong adaptor (or dont know how to use an adaptor) it will work .... i read about this on apples site somethin about a lotta people buying the WRONG ADAPTOR and then complainin (in the reviews for products)
Click to expand...

I wouldn't use such harsh words until that assertion gets an explanation. There very well could be some issue that those of us who have never used such an adaptor are clueless to.

I await an explanation patiently:)
 
nick9191 said:
And that would be great except:

1. It costs $99.
2. The damn thing is incompatible with half the displays out there, even Apple's own cinema displays.
Click to expand...

"Confucius says: Researching a product BEFORE buying leads to satisfaction!
Written by ES from Fairport
Feb 25, 2009
This is an excellent product that performs quite well if you understand its intended purpose. I use it in conjunction with a 22" HP w2207h LCD monitor via DVI to HDMI cable. I have no complaints.

It appears that some people are being mislead into leaving bad reviews, but in the end, User Error is to blame. To clarify, this is a SINGLE Link DVI adapter, intended to be used in conjunction with a SINGLE external monitor. Apple also sells a "Mini DisplayPort to DUAL-LINK DVI" adapter if you need to run, you guessed it, dual monitors!

That said, if you purchase a SINGLE-link adapter intending to run DUAL monitors, you'll be disappointment and logically assume it's because your MacBook Pro is vastly inferior to your neighbor's Vista laptop, not because you purchased the wrong item!"

Mini DisplayPort to DVI Adapter

it works buy the write adapter (much as i should use the right way to spell right for this sentence to make sense)
 
KBS756 said:
"Confucius says: Researching a product BEFORE buying leads to satisfaction!
Written by ES from Fairport
Feb 25, 2009
This is an excellent product that performs quite well if you understand its intended purpose. I use it in conjunction with a 22" HP w2207h LCD monitor via DVI to HDMI cable. I have no complaints.

It appears that some people are being mislead into leaving bad reviews, but in the end, User Error is to blame. To clarify, this is a SINGLE Link DVI adapter, intended to be used in conjunction with a SINGLE external monitor. Apple also sells a "Mini DisplayPort to DUAL-LINK DVI" adapter if you need to run, you guessed it, dual monitors!

That said, if you purchase a SINGLE-link adapter intending to run DUAL monitors, you'll be disappointment and logically assume it's because your MacBook Pro is vastly inferior to your neighbor's Vista laptop, not because you purchased the wrong item!"

Mini DisplayPort to DVI Adapter

it works buy the write adapter (much as i should use the right way to spell right for this sentence to make sense)
Click to expand...
That's true for the single-link adapter, but not for the dual-link converter. There are many professional reviews on the converter that say it doens't work half the time. Do some research. The dual-link requires an active converter, not a simple adapter like the single-link needs.
 
And about it costing $99, thats only if you need a dual link. For 85% of DVI displays, you're only gonna need the $29 adapter.

If your running 2 $1500 displays, you can afford a $99 adapter. It's 3.3% the price of the displays you bough for crying out loud. You probably got about that in reward points on your credit card when you both the things.
 
danny_w said:
That's true for the single-link adapter, but not for the dual-link converter. There are many professional reviews on the converter that say it doens't work half the time. Do some research. The dual-link requires an active converter, not a simple adapter like the single-link needs.
Click to expand...

Well than those complaints might be somewhat justified. But of all the people complaining on this forum about the mini-display port, how many of them are seriously negatively affected?
 
Abidubi said:
And about it costing $99, thats only if you need a dual link. For 85% of DVI displays, you're only gonna need the $29 adapter.

If your running 2 $1500 displays, you can afford a $99 adapter. It's 3.3% the price of the displays you bough for crying out loud. You probably got about that in reward points on your credit card when you both the things.
Click to expand...
I think people are more upset that the dual-link converter doesn't always work than with the $99 price. For that price it should work!
 
can someone explain how a 2.26ghz quad core with 8mb l3 is better then a 2.8 ghz octo with 24mb (combined) l2?
 
Macpropro80 said:
Anyone think "WTF" when they saw the new mac pro's today? I mean Come on, Mini-Display ports? Higher Price? No Firewire 400 AT ALL? Come on! We are professional users not 6th grade girls who use there mac books for facebook! I want 2 Dual-Link DVI ports on my graphic cards, that should be a given! I am happy that I have the early 2008 mac pro. I thought I would be upset that the upgrade made mine obsolete, but it trued out to be the opposite! I am glad I own the "old" mac pro. I hate to think that apple gave up on us "pro" users just so some snotty middle schoolers could easily plug there mac book into a 24inch display! This is an outrage! Steve jobs leaves for 2 months and the whole company already goes to hell!
Click to expand...

I agree with you. I am glad that I don't have to make a purchase choice right now. In early 2008 the update price was sweet and the bump to 8 core was a real delight.
I figure that with snow leopard and maybe the upcoming 4870 card and the next generation of apps that can use multiple cores and more than 3 gb ram, my 2008 8 core 2.8 is going to get a real performance boost without spending so much on an overpriced spec like the 2009 mac pro.
Now I can afford to wait a few years and see what develops with future hardware. Maybe when the case gets a new design it may be accompanied by some truly significant performance improvements as well.
 
Macpropro80 said:
can someone explain how a 2.26ghz quad core with 8mb l3 is better then a 2.8 ghz octo with 24mb (combined) l2?
Click to expand...

More like on par. Similar performance when running 4 cores of tasks, but it overclocks it's self by around 300MHz when some cores are idling. So when using core-challenged programs it will be faster as it would be a 2.56GHz with a faster architecture, probably comparable to the old 3.2GHz running a core-challenged program.

Didn't people talk the gigahertz myth to death back in 2003?

Oh, and there is no quad core 2.26. It's quad 2.66 or octo 2.26. In that case you replace the 4 core task above with 8.

Power when (and where) you need it.
The new Mac Pro introduces Turbo Boost: a dynamic performance technology that automatically boosts the processor clock speed based on workload. If you’re using an application that doesn’t need every core, Turbo Boost shuts off the idle cores while simultaneously increasing the speed of the active ones, up to 3.33GHz on a 2.93GHz Mac Pro.
Click to expand...

Edit: make that 400Mhz. So a 2.26 will run at 2.66GHz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back