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.
Do you think it's worth getting the new "Mac Pro" - Poll
- Thread starter Apple-Guy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
When I first heard about it I was really confused, as I was listening to the stream in the car. When I got home and checked it out I was really astonished to see the design and how they packed everything in, really unbelievable. It looks really cool. However, of course, there is that lack of expandability, but it is still way too early to make any informed decision without knowing all the details including the price. While it may not have 4 internal HD bays, it does make up for it with Thunderbolt 2 and USB 3. While it is not internal, you could setup a killer daisy chain TB setup. Of course, that will be really expensive (hopefully prices drop soon).
It does look like memory and perhaps the PCIe SSD are user serviceable, which is a must for me. Really just want some more details and full system specifications. I hope they stick in the 6 core standard and don't offer a base quad at $2499
I am not in the market for one of these, but I really want to know more and see it in person and checkout the cooling system.
It does look like memory and perhaps the PCIe SSD are user serviceable, which is a must for me. Really just want some more details and full system specifications. I hope they stick in the 6 core standard and don't offer a base quad at $2499
I am not in the market for one of these, but I really want to know more and see it in person and checkout the cooling system.
I cant wait to see geekbench scores.
It had better be at least $1000 better than an iMac to justify it's existence.
It had better be at least $1000 better than an iMac to justify it's existence.
The new Mac Pro is exactly what Steve would have wanted. The what would Steve have done bs on this forum has got to stop.
As long as no reviews has merged, I´ve no opinion. I don´t like the design, but beleive it will be very fast.
Anyway, I think it wil be very expensive, so my 3,1 will stay until further.
Anyway, I think it wil be very expensive, so my 3,1 will stay until further.
Timings are the primary reason, but the enterprise models usually include some additional sensors to help prevent a physical crash (head smacks platter). Think vibration; it gets to the point a physical crash is imminent, the controller then reduces the rpm (cuts power to the spindle) to bring it's rotational speed, and ultimately the vibration, back down to acceptable limits.
Anything used in a system has an effect on it's overall manufacturing costs.That would be something I brought up before. Many of the proponents of a smaller design suggested it would bring down the cost of the machine, because the price is really driven by the cost of aluminum and building sleds for SATA connections that are paid for either way
In this case, the physical enclosure and internal components don't appear to rely much, if at all, on aluminum (not surprised, given the recent increases in the cost for it). So they save some money there. Great. But it's going to be offset by the more expensive silicon (GPU's + CPU) used in this model vs. the budgets allocated for these components in the past.
As per peripherals, that's going to be dictated by how manufacturers/vendors perceive the demand for such products. If they see a massive demand, and can't get the parts, they'll be in contact with the misc. IC suppliers requesting more parts, and in turn, those part makers will do their best to comply as quickly as possible without harming their own companies (damage do to rampant growth or serious QC problems for example). There will be lots of meetings and so on, to be sure of what they think the demand is, and how long it will last, so if it's in their best interest to increase production, they'll do it. If not, they'll see it as a short-term spike, and continue on with existing plans.