Would you buy another Mac Pro?

[Alpinism]

The Mac has always been a 'creative machine' for Pro's and it is designed to be as such. Unfortunately when Apple decides to roam in the consumer world (starting with the iPod), lines were crossed and consumers get confused.

Nothing baffles me more than teenagers/yuppies that purchased a pro machine (MBP, MP), install Vista and then complained about the GPU not being powerful enough to play their windows based games.

We paid a lot of money for a Mac solely based on its solid OS and its solid software (namely FCS 2). Our studio's G5 still perform solidly with Maya 2008, Shake, PS CS3 and FCS 2 without a hitch with the old GPU. The oscar winning film "no country for old men" was edited 100% with a Mac Pro.

Yes, I personally cant wait to purchase the upcoming 12 core Nehalem next year, even if it costs $ 3500 for the stock model and I could care less if the GPU is still not upgradable with the latest and greatest for that latest person person shooter game.

 

[MacFanBoyIIe]

[Deleted text about how old and wise I am ]
While I still dabble in games, now 20 some odd years later, my main reason for griping here is I would also like my photo editing sessions to go without beach balls. Some of us shoot a lot of RAW and would like to run Aperture or iPhoto (and the photo editing pro-app flavor of the week) with a sense of snappiness. Just because the Mac Pro is right for your workflow, doesn't mean it's automatically right for everyone.

EDIT: This post was edited by a moderator. I was merely dispelling Alpinism's false assumptions. Is it too much to ask for "ePenis moderation" on both sides of this argument? Thank you.

 

[MacUser2525]

OS X has a larger user-base than Linux.

That is certainly debatable for paid installs most likely the truth for the installs that go unreported by most of the measurements out there there is not a hope in hell OSX has more than them just taking the super computers out there as an example there are literally thousands of computers running GNU/Linux in one spot for each of them that will never show in any metric .. Oh and if you actually measured by the GNU/free software installed instead of Linux kernel installed with it then OSX would fall right into that measurement there is a ton of GNU installed by default on every Mac.

 

[Infrared]

That is certainly debatable for paid installs most likely the truth for the installs that go unreported by most of the measurements out there there is not a hope in hell OSX has more than them just taking the super computers out there as an example there are literally thousands of computers running GNU/Linux in one spot for each of them that will never show in any metric .. Oh and if you actually measured by the GNU/free software installed instead of Linux kernel installed with it then OSX would fall right into that measurement there is a ton of GNU installed by default on every Mac.

That's some sentence. You can sprinkle a few full stops in
there if you like.

I hardly think the number of supercomputer users is going
to help Linux vanquish OS X

Not saying it's siuntifick or anyfink:

http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php

 

[giantrobot]

The Mac has always been a 'creative machine' for Pro's and it is designed to be as such. Unfortunately when Apple decides to roam in the consumer world (starting with the iPod), lines were crossed and consumers get confused.

Nothing baffles me more than teenagers/yuppies that purchased a pro machine (MBP, MP), install Vista and then complained about the GPU not being powerful enough to play their windows based games.

We paid a lot of money for a Mac solely based on its solid OS and its solid software (namely FCS 2). Our studio's G5 still perform solidly with Maya 2008, Shake, PS CS3 and FCS 2 without a hitch with the old GPU. The oscar winning film "no country for old men" was edited 100% with a Mac Pro.

Yes, I personally cant wait to purchase the upcoming 12 core Nehalem next year, even if it costs $ 3500 for the stock model and I could care less if the GPU is still not upgradable with the latest and greatest for that latest person person shooter game.

I hope you realize that offering a GPU upgrade path will not diminish the performance of the Mac Pro nor make your work any less serious. In fact, Apple has denied the GPU upgrade path because they want the current users to buy their new machine which is otherwise not significantly better than the previous model. No other workstation is crippled in this way and I am baffled by your defense of this.

All you are really defending is a planned obsolescence that Apple really goes out of its way to implement. How does it benefit you to defend this?

 

[Infrared]

In fact, Apple has denied the GPU upgrade path because they want the current users to buy their new machine [...]

Not "In fact". That's a guess at best.

 

[MacFanBoyIIe]

That's some sentence. You can sprinkle a few full stops in there if you like.

Maybe he's going for the Hemmingway effect....

 

[Gonk42]

OS X has a larger user-base than Linux.

I don't know the numbers but I guess what is important to people like nvidia is the user base in particular areas. iMac users are probably not going to be doing parallel processing on GPUs so it is the subset of Mac OS users who have Mac Pros and use them to do scientific computing vs the number of scientific computing people who have Unix work stations that will determine which market is addressed first.

I only gave this as an example because I was looking at feedback from Mac users on the forum on nvidia's site.

The majority of Mac Pro users are in the creative side of things (video, photography etc) and are well catered for. The people (like me) who want to do other things are in the minority so won't be a high priority for Apple, and if we go with Apple systems we won't be a high priority for third party hardware producers either.

 

[MacUser2525]

That's some sentence. You can sprinkle a few full stops in
there if you like.

I hardly think the number of supercomputer users is going
to help Linux vanquish OS X

Not saying it's siuntifick or anyfink:

http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php

Yeah probably could have put a couple of periods in there. You also still ignore the point that the vast majority of GNU/Linux installs are on machines that are never counted because every copy is not bought and paid for like most of the basic building blocks of the internet. With things like your Apache web servers, ftp sites, email you know the things that make this sh*t run then add in the home users and you have one hell of a large number.

 

[Infrared]

Yeah probably could have put a couple of periods in there. You also still ignore the point that the vast majority of GNU/Linux installs are on machines that are never counted because every copy is not bought and paid for like most of the basic building blocks of the internet. With things like your Apache web servers, ftp sites, email you know the things that make this sh*t run then add in the home users and you have one hell of a large number.

A large number, but a tiny percentage of the whole.

Sure, it's widely used for servers, and supercomputers,
but they do not account for a significant proportion of
the total user base. Unless you take as a user anyone
who accesses a site hosted by a Linux server, which is
a kind of contorted argument.

Most home users have never heard of Linux. It simply
doesn't exist in their world.

 

[MacUser2525]

A large number, but a tiny percentage of the whole.

Sure, it's widely used for servers, and supercomputers,
but they do not account for a significant proportion of
the total user base. Unless you take as a user anyone
who accesses a site hosted by a Linux server, which is
a kind of contorted argument.

Most home users have never heard of Linux. It simply
doesn't exist in their world.

Yeah it certainly does not even though they use it every day in their setup TV box, cell phone, many other little appliances too numerous to mention, the millions of machines running the internet the list is endless they don't see the air they breathe either it is still there ... Anyways enough of this.

 

[pastrychef]

Not "In fact". That's a guess at best.

I was going to point that out, too... But you beat me to it...

 

[Salavat23]

Yes, I personally cant wait to purchase the upcoming 12 core Nehalem next year, even if it costs $ 3500 for the stock model and I could care less if the GPU is still not upgradable with the latest and greatest for that latest person person shooter game.

The next Nehalem will be sweet.

It will be 16 core (2x8core).

However, because of hyperthreading, it will have up to 32 cores!!! (2 threads per core).

Plus, it will have 6 channels of DD3 ram.

That means it will have 12 slots of ram.

DDR3 has a maximum capacity of 16gb per stick, so you could put up to 192gb of ram into the Nehalem Mac Pro.

So, there will be a machine that will have up to 32 virtual cores, and expandability up to 192gb of ram.

 

[Tallest Skil]

I'm... pretty sure it won't be sixteen cores.
And I can't see any way of shoehorning twelve RAM slots into the Mac Pro.

But a departure from FB-DIMMs would be welcome, even though Apple will still use them for Nehalem.

 

[Techguy172]

I would really like it if they could move away from the FB-Dimms it would be a whole lot cheaper.

 

[Salavat23]

I'm... pretty sure it won't be sixteen cores.
And I can't see any way of shoehorning twelve RAM slots into the Mac Pro.

But a departure from FB-DIMMs would be welcome, even though Apple will still use them for Nehalem.

Yes it will.

Nehalem will be 2-8 cores.

Apple will most likely offer a dual Quad Core standard (8 real cores, 16 virtual cores). Then there will be a 16 core option (32 virtual) just like there was on the original Mac Pro.

Plus, there will be DDR3 FB-DIMMs just like there are now DDR2 FB-DIMMs.

And it it not hard to get 12 slots in. Just put 6 slots per riser card, and eliminate the heatsinks on the ram to make more room.

DDR3 runs at 1.5V compared to DDR2 which runs at 1.8V. Therefore, it will run much cooler, and the heatsinks could either get smaller, or be removed altogether.

 

[Tallest Skil]

...and eliminate the heatsinks on the ram to make more room...

I can see THAT going over well.

 

[Salavat23]

I can see THAT going over well.

Well there would be little need for them since DDR3 runs much cooler

 

[Alpinism]

Workflow has nothing to do with any of my claim. Final Cut Studio 2 is a god send for the small indie filmmakers like us. It is so good and concise as such that it was used to edit oscar caliber films and it only cost $1299. The program Color is an over $10k program before it was given out for free with FCS 2.

If our little studio can run FCS 2 on our aging G5 with its aging and antiquated GPU, I really dont know why you are having so much trouble with Aperture and PS CS3 on a much newer machine. Then again, we treat and respect our MAC as being a work machine in such that we don't install or bloat it with unnecessary software and silly applications.

In fact, pure and simple a Mac pro is a tool targeted towards the pro. It is designed and sold to be as such. Apple is a CLOSED system that works really good, PERIOD. Apple controls both hardware and software for the MAC, plain and simple. The way Apple rule their Close system with an iron fist is one of the reasons why the OS and the software work beautifully together.

But you know what ? Apple is the first in the industry to support the XDCAM EX codec format apart from Sony with Sony Vegas. So for the pros (especially filmmakers) Apple is WAY AHEAD OF THE CURVE.

There is a really good reading in the latest WIRED Magazine regarding Apple's business model. This months business week also has a very interesting 1 page cover regarding how apple is now trying to conqueror the "Business or Corporate" market.

[Deleted text about how old and wise I am ]
While I still dabble in games, now 20 some odd years later, my main reason for griping here is I would also like my photo editing sessions to go without beach balls. Some of us shoot a lot of RAW and would like to run Aperture or iPhoto (and the photo editing pro-app flavor of the week) with a sense of snappiness. Just because the Mac Pro is right for your workflow, doesn't mean it's automatically right for everyone.

EDIT: This post was edited by a moderator. I was merely dispelling Alpinism's false assumptions. Is it too much to ask for "ePenis moderation" on both sides of this argument? Thank you.

 

[MacFanBoyIIe]

Workflow has nothing to do with any of my claim. Final Cut Studio 2 is a god send for the small indie filmmakers like us. It is so good and concise as such that it was used to edit oscar caliber films and it only cost $1299. The program Color is an over $10k program before it was given out for free with FCS 2.

If our little studio can run FCS 2 on our aging G5 with its aging and antiquated GPU, I really dont know why you are having so much trouble with Aperture and PS CS3 on a much newer machine. Then again, we treat and respect our MAC as being a work machine in such that we don't install or bloat it with unnecessary software and silly applications.

In fact, pure and simple a Mac pro is a tool targeted towards the pro. It is designed and sold to be as such. Apple is a CLOSED system that works really good, PERIOD. Apple controls both hardware and software for the MAC, plain and simple. The way Apple rule their Close system with an iron fist is one of the reasons why the OS and the software work beautifully together....

I'm really glad that you are not having problems with your G5. Seriously. But, how is what you described not your workflow?
Regardless (semantics aside), video editing tends to be more CPU intensive and batch photo editing tends to be more GPU intensive. This is why I am NOT complaining about my video editing. I just want the option to put a better GPU in my Mac Pro. This is a MUST for me. How many 1st Gen Mac Pro owners got tired of waiting and just said "**** it," eBayed their old Mac Pro, and bought a new one in order to solve this problem? This is not a road I want to go down.
I guess some people buy a new car every year, and some people (like me) like to buy a new car and then enjoy it for 2-3 years before trading it in.

...I would bet you know next to nothing about 64-bit EFI implementations and what is involved in writing EFI code. You have absolutely no idea what decisions were made and what the technical challenges were[1]. Only people on the inside really know this....[1] Writing drivers and firmware is insanely difficult. And one missed bug can bring down the OS.

I would bet most people know next to nothing about 64-bit EFI implementations. You don't know what I do or what my degrees are in. Don't make assumptions of what people know or don't know.
This problem is not a question of difficulty or technical challenges. The 1st Gen Mac Pros are fully capable of supporting the 8800GT, given the right supporting drivers/firmware. Apple obviously invested the software engineers' man-hours into developing this for the Early '08 Mac Pros and didn't do the same for the previous generation Mac Pros. Why? Well as you say we have "no idea what decisions were made." But it doesn't take a software engineer to figure out that it's all about forcing the new Mac Pros down the throats of 1st Gen owners. And from some of the comments I've seen on this thread, it's working.

 

[dukeblue91]

First of all Hell yes I would buy another MP when I need one.

Now to the OP.
I don't know why you call your MP an obsolete machine, you bought it 6 mos. ago with the GPU you have now.
Had Apple not come out with another machine with a new GPU you'd still be a happy camper today.
Also I think you people should wait a little longer to see what really will happen, the 8800GT has been out of stock and on backorder for the most part since it's intro on the new Mac and just now is slowly becoming fully available for the newer Mac.

It would have made no sense for Apple to dedicate much time and announcements when the card was not yet available in the first place.

Also had you done your research prior to buying your MP you would have known that a new system was coming out very shortly.

So enjoy what you bought and wait and see what will happen.
Your MP is as capable today as it was 6 mos. ago, no change.

Just for the record I have the HD2600 and I'm very happy with it.

 

[pastrychef]

I would bet most people know next to nothing about 64-bit EFI implementations. You don't know what I do or what my degrees are in. Don't make assumptions of what people know or don't know.
This problem is not a question of difficulty or technical challenges. The 1st Gen Mac Pros are fully capable of supporting the 8800GT, given the right supporting drivers/firmware. Apple obviously invested the software engineers' man-hours into developing this for the Early '08 Mac Pros and didn't do the same for the previous generation Mac Pros. Why? Well as you say we have "no idea what decisions were made." But it doesn't take a software engineer to figure out that it's all about forcing the new Mac Pros down the throats of 1st Gen owners. And from some of the comments I've seen on this thread, it's working.

How do you know they went out of their way to prevent the 8800GT from working in 1st gen Mac Pros??? Why didn't they do it with the Radeon HD 2600XT, too???

I really think the conspiracy theorist in you is getting the better of you.

 

[MacFanBoyIIe]

I really think the conspiracy theorist in you is getting the better of you.

I truly hope you're right. But what other reason could it be? And why hasn't Apple given us a reason for not releasing it to the 1st Gen Mac Pros? If they spent all that time developing for it to work in the newer Mac Pros, someone involved had to have said, "Hey guys, we should be doing this for the tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands?) of older Mac Pros too!" This is friggin' common sense, man!

All of the other features on the Mac Pro are great! OS X is the best consumer operating system on the market; at least 5 years ahead of anything Microsoft will put out. But for me, not being able to upgrade the GPU, like you can in any pro-PC, is a deal-breaker.
The Mac Pro is not just a computer. To me (and that's what matters), it's an investment. I spend that kind of cash on one, I want to get the best resale value I can out of it. If I know now I won't be able to upgrade its GPU, I need to either decide to keep it (like some kept their G4s), or sell it soon while it's still worth something.
Some of you just bought a new, early '08 Mac Pro. What happens in 9 months when the next refresh happens and you find out you are stuck with something for the rest of your machine's life? Your Mac Pro will be just 12 months old (or less) and not upgradable. Some smarty-pants on the internet will tell you "Well, you should have done the research!"
If this happens, some of you won't care and will just buy the new one, I know. But most of you won't want to have to deal with that situation.

 

[pastrychef]

I truly hope you're right. But what other reason could it be? And why hasn't Apple given us a reason for not releasing it to the 1st Gen Mac Pros? If they spent all that time developing for it to work in the newer Mac Pros, someone involved had to have said, "Hey guys, we should be doing this for the tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands?) of older Mac Pros too!" This is friggin' common sense, man!

I've hypothesized in the past and continue to that it was a screw up of nVidia.

When was the last time Apple let anyone know what they were doing ahead of time?

When handed the task of writing the firmware for the 8800GT, the topic of previous generation Mac Pros could very well have never come up. Heck, the team involved in writing the firmware may not have even had the previous gen Mac Pros in the lab. (this is paragraph is all conjecture)

 

[iBlue]

...

EDIT: This post was edited by a moderator. I was merely dispelling Alpinism's false assumptions. Is it too much to ask for "ePenis moderation" on both sides of this argument? Thank you.

Believe me, the mods probably don't care about the argument, they edit when necessary. No decent points of argument would be edited out but insults and swearing might. (I didn't see the edit, just sayin') If you see something that needs moderating, report the post.


P.S. I've got a mac pro 2.8 Octo and I love it.