Monday? are you sure? In my mind it was a tuesday like always, then again, I don't really remember that kind of details.
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.
BTO Mac Pros facing LONG delays
- Thread starter wrldwzrd89
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Monday? are you sure? In my mind it was a tuesday like always, then again, I don't really remember that kind of details.
I hope they don't release the MacPro yet. Unless it has the expected Xeon Ivy Bridge which is coming (supposedly) in Q2. Once they can put in an Ivy Bridge, they should release the new MacPros. Who knows? Perhaps Apple already has the new Ivy Bridge processors, but Intel hasn't announced them decisively as of mid-April.
Fair enough. But then the answer to the question (When do we assume ...?) is different for each person waiting for that answer. In my case, the 'when' happens the day my current 2008 MP breaks. For someone who needs a MP this week, for whatever reasons, then I think the answer for them is sooner. Much sooner.
Unless they decide that an upscale iMac is the new Pro unit. Don't be surprised if this is what Apple's answer is.
This might be a technicality, but if they move away from Xeons with the Mac Pro, I'd think it comes with a major case redesign and new name. So, no the Ivy Bridges coming out now-ish can't be for the Mac Pro, simply by definition that it won't then be a Mac Pro.
It's possible (either that or an Ivy Bridge i7 tower). Either way, with Mac Pro production seemingly spinning down, it should be soon.
That "upscale" iMac will most likely have to destroy the current slim design. If an i7-2600 can cook an egg on the top it will be super scary with 6-cores in it. LCD burn through
We all know their foray into liquid cooling was a disaster.
We all know their foray into liquid cooling was a disaster.
Not for years. Apple is still churning out Radeon HD2600's for the 2008 Pro's. I know I got a replacment in November. They buy all the B class products to keep for replacements etc. They'll have 1000's in stock.
Mac Pros arrived
Ordered three 12-core Xeon Pros two weeks ago and they finally showed up today. Still Xeon, still kickass.
Ordered three 12-core Xeon Pros two weeks ago and they finally showed up today. Still Xeon, still kickass.
GPU chips are typically created in batches. Once a run is done, they move on to other things. I would bet my last doughnut that any 2600s Apple is handing out today, have a GPU chip made in 2008/9 or so. ATI /AMD / TSMC made a few million and they are sitting in various warehouses, etc. Once they are made they are like a hot potato. Everyone who gets possession knows that with each passing day they are worth LESS than they were the day before.
Nobody wants to get stuck holding on to them for 4 years...unless of course you are Apple or Dell or HP and can call them a "server" or "workstation" part in which case you can continue to say they are worth $125 when their value on open market would be closer to $25.
$125? That's generous, whilst they waited for the old one to reach them, they held a charge of £175 on the credit card.
That "upscale" iMac will most likely have to destroy the current slim design. If an i7-2600 can cook an egg on the top it will be super scary with 6-cores in it. LCD burn through
We all know their foray into liquid cooling was a disaster.
And the current slim design is rumored to get slimmer this time.
There are no Ivy Bridge i7 6-Core chips on the horizon that would be available for an iMac update. There may not be any either, although that is a marketing decision for Intel rather than a technical one.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5174/why-ivy-bridge-is-still-quad-core
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5174/why-ivy-bridge-is-still-quad-core
I don't know SBE seems to be a pretty big improvement on Westmere to me. Maybe the consumer level stuff isn't moving quite as fast, but that's probably because it simply doesn't have too. Typical users often have plenty horse power now, plus AMD isn't exactly pushing intel too hard on the top end. The lower end integrated graphics stuff for budget gaming rigs or HTPC, sure, but not so much for anything else.
Correct me if i'm wrong - Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge would use the same socket, so an upgrade would be possible
It doesn't have to destroy the design. The 27" iMac case is different from the 21.5" case ( about one inch deeper.). The difference in height and width is primarily driven by the screen differences, but that is indicative that components can drive modest variances.
Currently the 27" is 8" deep/thick. That is deeper than previous smaller "top end" screened iMacs and it didn't implode the design to step from 6-7" to 8". The overall design won't implode if add another 1-2". The HP Z1 is twice as thick as the top end iMac and the design balance is not destroy the proportions between the height, width, and depth
An 27" iMac that had a higher gamut screen , another 1-2 inches to facilitate access to HDD/SDDs , and better cooling. They can leverage an Xeon E3 and use the $2K-3K price range.
The E3 is less kneecapped on PCI-e bandwidth ( 4x lanes for Thunderbolt as opposed to the i5 and mainstream i7 that limited to 16 max and share/split lanes to support TB connectivity. ).
I'm sorry but are you campaigning for a Xeon all-in-one? Yes, they could do it. But why? The whole point is to keep any semblance of modularity (if that is a word).
No, I am dispelling the notion that an iMac with substantially more performance and accessibility can't be created without destroy the basics of the design.
The arguments about how the iMac cannot implement every feature of the Mac Pro are circular. If pile up all the the features of the Mac Pro as design requirements you will end up with something very Mac Pro like when done.
The "why"? If Apple decides the Mac Pro class of machines are not a viable market for them then the "why" is extremely simple. With the Mac Pro gone, there is now an empty gap in the over $2K Mac Product line up. Apple can peel off a higher number of the ex-Mac Pro users with a Xeon E3 iMac that has more of the features Mac Pro users grumble about ( 'better screen', 'easier replaceable drives' , 'better GPU' , etc.) than just letting all of those folks leave. The objective is not to get all of them. The objective is to get some of them while maximizing reuse of another Mac model to keep tight control on R&D cost increase. The bulk of the R&D savings from the cancellations would be plowed into another Mac Model that has higher chances of average-to-above-avg growth and profits. At the same time they are still buying the more expensive versions of CPU/GPUs from Intel to maintain that relationship at similar levels as they currently have. Same with LCD vendors (more lucrative parts being sold through to the customer)
An iMac with:
Ivy Bridge Xeon E3 quad 3.4, 3.5, and 3.7GHz ( http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2012/2012020701_Prices_of_Xeon_E3-1200_v2_CPUs.html )
27" high gamut screen with antiglare options
2 Thunderbolt (TB) ports
one 10GbE port and one 1GbE port
two drive sleds/cages that are accessible being a panel
a GPU power budget of around 75-80W (highest end mobile, entry desktop range )
would be competitive with the entry level E5 1600 quad (1620 3.6GHz) on the market. Same number of cores and similar clock speeds (give up some cache and substantive amount of memory bandwidth which will impact some workloads). There is a high speed network port built in so don't need to use slot. Similarly, TB compensates for some x2-x4 PCI-e cards.
Is that going to work for folks would need two card GPU+GPGPU combos? No. For multiple 10GbE ports? No. Internal RAID 5. No. Need 12 cores. No. It doesn't have to.
Should Apple cancel a viable Mac Pro platform solely because they could make the above "performance" iMac? No. With some improvements:
E5 1600's so that have both a high clocker (3.6GHz) and sub $3K 6 core box.
Better case so that not gratuitously rack hostile.
More cost effective paths to 32GB RAM.
built in 6Gbs SATA channels
they could almost certainly sell more than they have over the past 2 years where the entry models have been hampered, increasingly had to cover some XServe contexts, and increasing have to deal with 64-bit apps that will use large blocks of memory. Those are far greater issues/blockers than lack of Thunderbolt. Between pushing the prices closer to the $2K border and adding TB ..... pushing the prices closer to the border is more important to long term model survivability.
There are a couple of external factors that Apple didn't have 100% control over that have suppressed Mac Pro sales over last 2 years. It is almost certainly worth one more shot at trying to get a better picture of whether it is a viable growth+profits market before terminating it. Probably a better option than a MBA 15" (where flush performance and sockets just to do yet another maximally thin box. ). However, if Apple releases an updated Mac Pro and the sales don't jump off the historical charts then Apple certainly has options. An iMac derivative device to fill the $2-3K range is an extremely viable option if that gap opens up.
^^^Yawn.
Why is your objective to propose successful options for Apple's pocketbooks? You're a consumer like everyone else. Let Apple worry about their profit logistics. I could care less. Real pro options or I leave to hackintosh land stealing everything in the process. Also driving countless users to do the same.
Why is your objective to propose successful options for Apple's pocketbooks? You're a consumer like everyone else. Let Apple worry about their profit logistics. I could care less. Real pro options or I leave to hackintosh land stealing everything in the process. Also driving countless users to do the same.
I have to agree with Derb.
If Apple do kill off their professional workstations I will look in to making my own Hackintosh too. Since the x86 transfer in 2006 it got much easier to do, so why be held to ransom by a company more interested in portable devices and consumer grade shiny screens?
If Apple do kill off their professional workstations I will look in to making my own Hackintosh too. Since the x86 transfer in 2006 it got much easier to do, so why be held to ransom by a company more interested in portable devices and consumer grade shiny screens?
It is not. Why is it your objective to perpetrate that it is?
The iMac above is clearly has value to some professionals. 10GbE, 27" high gamut screens, and Xeon processors ... you have another vendor offering that "out of the box" in the $2-3K range?
I'm looking for win/win outcomes. If you want to play the "F'you Apple" game you're welcome to it. All this posturing is comical.
"Real pro" ... yawn ... again. Empty posturing. There are numerous pros not using Mac Pros. The box doesn't make you a pro.
Building a business upon license violations. Knock yourself out.
As for countless other users .... LOL. If there were countless Mac Pro users it wouldn't get canceled. If the Mac Pro is cancelled and users bolt to non Mac systems, it will primarily be to Windows. Linux probably in second place. hackintoshes will probably be in a distant third.
I can't speak for professionals but I can say this.
I've been a member of ADC for over 10 years and I've owned multiple Mac Pros.
If they discontinue the Mac Pro I will build a hackintosh.
Some pros want the flexibility that comes with a tower unit.
Lol
Cost is not an issue. If it is $4-6K and I get what I want it is worth it. I don't really care what value they bring to the table. Only that they bring something viable.
Should have been quoted "Real pro options". 1 intent. As in tangible options in a modular environment. The iMac is not that. You have to keep extra iMac's on hand at all times. Looks bad.
Hackintosh angle was for personal use.
Apple cancels things on pure spite. The money it takes to keep development up and running on a system based entirely of 3rd party components with very few repair cycles is super low to their profits. Why not keep it? Simplification and their way of "teaching" us. At least 1 viable enterprise option (which is all that is left) is in their best interests in corralling the possible "halo" effected Mac users.