Why is everyone so Dissappointed?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by thelongmorrow, Mar 4, 2009.

  1. thelongmorrow macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Location:
    Upstate, NY
    #1
    I don't understand everyone's disappointments with the new Mac Pros. First In my opinion people see lower clock speeds and think there getting less and don't understand that the processor is built different. See it as my 3.4 L Pontiac grand am isn't as fast/efficient/powerful as a 1.8 L lotus Elise. Sorry really bad analogy but it kind of makes sense. The newer CPUs that are being made "although they may run at the same or a lower clock rate as older CPUs, get more instructions completed per clock cycle". The new processors use less energy and get more done with less. Any way, my knowledge is very limited in this area but I do have an understanding that bigger clock speed isnt always better!

    Second: I am not buying a computer based on its look/case, the cheese grater design is actually practical as it helps get more air where it is needed. I am buying it based on expandability to keep up with future products/demands with out buying a new machine every 2 years, as well as a ton of other reasons. SPEND the $5 on the FW connector and stop complaining about faster technology. I guess they should still use USB 1.1 because some of your old devices still use that!?:D

    Third: The entry-level Quad is what every one has been asking for, and don't complain that the prices went up, I still have to hear it form my mom that bubble gum use to cost 2 cents. Its the nature of products in general. Plus the 8gbs of ram more than plenty that most pro-sumers need who buy the entry level pro. (by the way, I spoke to Apple and they said that you do "loose some by going from 6gb(tri-channel) to 8gb(dual-channel) for test purposes but you gain more in the end using 8gb for real use application."

    Plus the new Quad core uses 8 virtual cores. imagine 8 actual cores as a wide open 8 lane freeway, 8 virtual cores is the same highway except with some traffic lights to help control the traffic, it may be a little slower when using all the lanes but all in all most users wont need to utilize all the lanes 100% of the time.

    Fourth: I am buying my mac pro w/ this configurations:
    One 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
    3GB (3x1GB) (I am upgrading through OWC to save $100):D
    640GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s (I rather put the $90 apple upgrade cost to buying a second drive (1TB 7200 rmp) from new egg for $130):D
    ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB
    One 18x SuperDrive (ONCE again saving $60 by adding second through OWC):D

    Sorry If i sound rude or ranting, but this really isn't a bad update and i think people just don't understand the update and are jumping on the band wagon. So for now take a look at apples benchmarks, and I think most people will be surprised when 3rd party benchmarks come out that this is a good update.

    PS by the way i am no expert at all but have been doing some research. A very nice lady at apple researched my questions and got back to me with real answers about the new mac pro. (she wasn't from the apple store, most those guys are high school kids with no clue) Sorry if my analogies make no sense, they do to me!:cool:
     
  2. grue macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Somewhere.
    #2
    I'm mainly just annoyed that the video card choices suck harder than a sorority girl on a Friday night, especially for us Gen I 8core owners.
     
  3. thelongmorrow thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Location:
    Upstate, NY
    #3
    True, Apple does tend to leave users with older tech in the dark, but I don't think its mostly their fault, I beleive it has to do with firmware issues as well as the graphic card companies not making these cards/drivers for apple hardware.
     
  4. thejadedmonkey macrumors 604

    thejadedmonkey

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Location:
    Pa
    #4
    I think is mostly is their fault. Because Apple insists on being in full control of the OS, hardware, and firmware, if something isn't working, it's Apple's fault.

    Lets compare: I build a computer 6 years ago. Today, I decide I want to put a new video card in it. I go to Best Buy, get an (overpriced) PCI graphics card, and put it in... it'll work. Or, if my computer has a PCI-e16 slot, I can use ANY PCI-e16 graphics card, and... it'll work.

    The only full-size desktops on the market (that I know of) that can't be upgraded are Apple desktops. Apple likes to screw their customers any way possible, but it gets them money, so the stock holders don't complain.
     
  5. NoNameBrand macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2005
    Location:
    Halifax, Canada
    #5
    The video card options are perfectly fine for what I need.

    Outside the US, the major complaint seems to be that the perceived value-for-money has diminished. I think that's the case with the US prices too, but the rise there wasn't as high in other countries with currencies that are weak vs the USD.
     
  6. Weepul macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    #6
    Before making up analogies about automotive traffic, you might want to check Apple's own benchmarks on the 8-core system and notice that the new machines offer almost no more speed for your dollar than before, very much in contrast to the increase in value seen when the 8x2.8 was introduced. (Third party benchmarks will be very interesting to see, of course.)

    How the quad-core system stacks up remains to be seen (Apple didn't post any benchmarks for those), but people have been saying it's also expensive compared to similar-performing PCs, and it also has had its RAM limit crippled compared to the quad-core configuration available previously with the 2.8.

    And what pro user would rather have 1x DVI and 1x Mini DisplayPort rather than 2x DVI? They could have at least included a MiniDP to dual-link DVI in the box, rather than extorting an extra $99 for people with high-end multi-display setups.

    I think these are reasonable things to be disappointed about.
     
  7. thelongmorrow thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Location:
    Upstate, NY
    #7
    This is a retarded feature, but i am curious to see what apple will do when they update their displays. Maybe the ends justify the means. (but again apple makes us pay $20 for a remote that use to be included) And on the bench marks, I think SL and grand central will help these improve. (As it will also improve performance of the 2008 chips as well)

    I just think there is more complaining about smaller things... eg no case refresh. (look at the IPOD classic, the highest capacity ipod, and its pretty much remained the same design for the longest time)
     
  8. Wormy23 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    #8
    Well, DisplayPort is the future. DVI was at it's limit with the 2560x1600 resolution. By Apple moving to DisplayPort, you'll soon start to see even HIGHER resolution displays...

    It's actually a good move by Apple to push DisplayPort. In a few years, you'll have 3840 X 2400 displays from the MacPro you are purchasing today. If they included a 2xDVI connector graphics card, you wouldn't be as futureproof as you are now.

    If you really want 2xDVI's, go buy their last gen card... HD2600 to stick in the MacPro to support an extra 2 DVI's. Get it off ebay, it's probably cheaper.
     
  9. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #9
    Apple were offering a $2800 computer with two $800 processors. Now they offer a $2500 system with one $300 processor or a $3300 system with two $375 processors. So from a "value for money for the actual hardware" perspective things have changed and there is a premium. It wasn't unreasonable to expect two 2.66GHz quad cores for the $3,299 price.

    Finance aside, there are still other niggling issues like the video card thing mentioned above. Also the use of 4 and 8 memory slots rather than 6 and 12 that will be found on similar systems from other vendors is a let down for some. Also Apple could have probably offered a Radeon 4670 and GeFroce 260 Core 216 instead of what they have which are both better cards.

    Most of it really relates to the fact Apple are using generic hardware and then limiting it or charging more for it, easy to complain when you have a good idea how much the parts cost and the sort of margins they have.
     
  10. Bubba Satori Suspended

    Bubba Satori

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    Location:
    B'ham
    #10
    No pro video cards on the Mac "PRO". Not a single Quadro or FirePro. Take the dam* Pro name off the computer. Pro computers have the option at least for pro video cards.

    No updated ACDs in different sizes to go with them. I can go to any workstation manufacturer and choose from at least half a dozen monitors.

    Paltry base memory. 3GB ? What a joke. I sell $700 Gateway i7s that come with 8GB, 750GB HD and a 4870.

    8GB memory limit on single quad. :rolleyes:

    Worthless GT120 is half of the video cards offered. Insulting, really. :(

    No Blu-ray for HD video shooters. :mad:

    Increased prices. :confused:

    Five year old looking case.
     
  11. thedarkhorse macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #11
    if you look at the "Nehalem multithreaded performance/price: Apple's benchmarks" thread you will see that the performance:dollar value ratio has gone down a lot based on apple's own benchmarks(which are usually well in their favor under best circumstances).
    A few days ago you could get a quad core mac pro that could hold up to 32gb of ram & had another processor slot if you wanted to add a second cpu down the line. Now you can get a quad core mac pro that can have a max of 8gb of ram and no second cpu for $300 more.
    What do you expect, praise for apple for offering the customer far less value?
     
  12. Finalcutpro78 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    #12
    I'm just pissed that their entry level desktop is $2,500. And don't tell me that a mac mini or iMac is a substitute. They need to have a desktop that starts at $900 or less.
     
  13. thedarkhorse macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #13
    yeah it is kinda a shame that if you want a mac that isn't built with laptop components the minimum price is $2500. They need to make the cube for the new age.
     
  14. tom. macrumors 6502

    tom.

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #14
    OP, you have made some terrible arguments in that post. I don't think there is necessarily a complete blindness to the fact these new CPUs can offer similar performance at lower clock speeds. A lot of Apple customers, especially the 'pro' end of the market are used to waiting for new models to come out based on release patterns are getting more for the same money. I'm not going to open up another argument as to what you are getting here but I think the problem is we are getting similar performance with a heavily increased price. If this new standard octo was the same price as the old 8 x 2.8GHz i think there would be a lot let fuss and a lot more happy buyers.

    You have made the reference to things generally increasing in price over time - i.e chewing gum. This is how I see it:

    A. 8 x 2.8 Mac Pro / 2GB/ 320GB / HD2600XT £1712
    B. 8 x 2.26 Mac Pro / 6GB / 640GB / GT120 £2500

    2500 - 1712 = £788 Increase in price

    that is 46% Increase over £1712, that almost half as much on TOP! You MIGHT be able to convince me (unlikely) that there is a 46% increase in performance of B over A, however, even if that is the case, we are paying for that performance increase when previously that cost is covered by TIME. We are supposed to pay the same for more product not more for more product. I think that is why people are disappointed, it definitely is not the same value for money as the 2k8 Mac Pro was on its release day.

    I am one of the many that have always thought the Mac Pro was a great buy, but this time after selling my 2.8 Octo I cannot justify buying another.
     
  15. Sesshi macrumors G3

    Sesshi

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Location:
    One Nation Under Gordon
    #15
    I think that speaks volumes for the nature of Mac owners in the main and the increase of that by the influx of Switchers who were basically just Mac owners in waiting, as does many other changes in the lineup as of late.

    However as I said before, perhaps Apple are also waiting on a Quadro or FireGL card with mini-DP.

    I find it very interesting though that the Pro gets so much press coverage, when e.g. a Precision or an xw refresh gets zero - especially as many more Windows users in terms of numbers would actually use the power of the Nehalems in more uses than merely video editing.

    I'm willing to give the tech press more credit then being a bunch of Apple fanboys - or should I?
     
  16. inigel macrumors regular

    inigel

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Location:
    Australia
    #16
    I agree with you there. The reason why the iPod has looked the same for so long is because it "just works". People are familiar with the design and don't feel alienated when the newer generations come out. The iMac has had the same form factor for almost 5 years because it's perfect.

    On to the Mac Pro, there isn't a genuine reason to change the case. The current design is sturdy, looks good and has the ability of having three internal over hauls going from PowerMac G5 to Mac Pro, and then to the new Nehalem MPs.

    IMO, the case doesn't need to be redesigned. I think people just want it to be redesigned just so it looks new again. Like the OPs car analogies, people didin't want to buy the same looking Beetle forever, and eventually Volkswagon changed it. 40 odd years later though :D
     
  17. ccuk macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    #17
    To be honest that's not the point. The majority of users who buy a Mac Pro will be semi-professional to professional studios/users and will continue to use their DVI based displays, since they will likely have invested in high end displays. Adding a DisplayPort to the Mac Pro at a later date wouldn't exactly be difficult since it's just a graphics card swap. Even then, Apple could have placed two Mini DisplayPorts on the card, and shipped two DVI adapters to keep the end user happy. I just feel like I am watching the whole Pro end of Apples line-up slowly converge with the consumer end.
     
  18. Foggy macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2006
    Location:
    London, UK
    #18
    Mainly because my requirement is Memory capacity and HDD storage. I really don't need the speed of the new processors but to me the single processor option is crippled by its lack of memory capacity. Last month I could have bought the 2xquad core base model, upgraded it to 12GB Ram and 2TB or so of hdd storage (from external suppliers) and it still came in at under £2k (ex vat). If I want to do the same now I am looking at £3k or so. This means the 2 machines I wanted to by have gone from £4k to £6k and my boss had taken a lot of persuading for the £4k option. As such my I simply can't afford the machine.

    Whilst I could probably be fine with the single processor model for now, any machine I do get needs to last me at least 4-5 years and I would be getting it already maxed out with 8gb ram with no capacity for further expansion.

    What I wish is that they would still let you buy the old model but with a price cut.
     
  19. ccuk macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    #19
    Hey, get to http://www.macwarehouse.co.uk they still have some old Mac Pro's left. Not sure if any are specced at or at the price you might want to pay. Worth giving them a call as well, they sometimes give a discount :p
     
  20. ViRGE macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    #20
    Out of curiosity, what do you run that would require a "pro" video card under OS X. The usual distinctions such as drivers are not nearly as prevalent under OS X as they are Windows. I'm not sure there are many - if any - cases where a pro card is going to be more helpful under OS X. It will just cost more.

    They certainly could have done better than a 4870 though. ATI's OSX drivers are not the greatest even when Apple has control, and it's not as powerful as something like the GTX285. More ever it leaves the Pro without a good CUDA capable card, and while Snow Leopard should fix this, I'm not convinced ATI is going to have their act in gear in time.
     
  21. grue macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Somewhere.
    #21

    Or a current-model GTX 260, for that matter.
     
  22. Pika macrumors 68000

    Pika

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #22
    This is the main reason why i wont buy a Mac Pro this year. It feels like buying a 5 years old machine.
     
  23. Sesshi macrumors G3

    Sesshi

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Location:
    One Nation Under Gordon
    #23
    It's interesting - and maybe predictable - to note there are more issues with the look of the machine than it's thermal and mechanical inadequacies. I have no problems with the look - it still is contemporary next to it's more industrial cousins.

    I'd be pretty happy to upgrade many of the existing Pros if they revised the cooling layout. Maybe next year...?
     
  24. NoNameBrand macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2005
    Location:
    Halifax, Canada
    #24

    I'm sure you could put neon lights in it or something. Or paint it black. Black's always in style.

    Personally, I'd put drink umbrellas in the holes at the front.
     
  25. drnen macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    #25
    Personally I'm waiting to see some real benchmarks. I was thinking of getting the quad with updated ram+video but its still a hard price to swallow. If benchmarks are not terribly impressive then i am going to give SERIOUS consideration to trying the hackintosh route..
     

Share This Page