While probably generally true, the Mac Pro is the exception to that rule for Mac users. A large part of the reason designers, editors, etc., bought it in the past was so they could switch out video cards, capture cards, etc.
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.
I really like the new MP
- Thread starter dollystereo
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
While probably generally true, the Mac Pro is the exception to that rule for Mac users. A large part of the reason designers, editors, etc., bought it in the past was so they could switch out video cards, capture cards, etc.
In some ways I could not agree more with you.
• Whiners should shut up, especially all those naysayers were not in line for a new Mac Pro in any case.
• The design looks awesome. Thank you
for doing away with the desktop box -concept.• Apple should offer a 2CPU&1GPU option as well. Not every Mac Pro owner needs a workstation GPU (never mind 2).
In other ways I could not agree less:
• Whether the design is good (as opposed to just "looks good") will become evident only once we get a chance to throw a nasty handbrake queue at it and listen to how much noise it produces
• Whether the product concept is "for us" will only become clear once apple publishes the final configuration options and pricing.
IMO, the key to apple's comparative success (apple's sales beating Wintel sales development) in recent years has been that the relatively narrow lineup has managed to attract a wide audience. The 13" MBP is used by everything from college brats to serious businessmen; the iMac attracts stay-at-home parents as well as design professionals. For the nMP to be able to get decent sales, the machine needs to be able to do the same - attract enthusiasts as well as CAD-numbercrunchers and 4K video editors.
For the nMP to be able to have a broad-range appeal it really needs to (top 3):
• be able to attract the CPU-intensive crowd as well as the GPU-intensive crowd
• have competitive entry-level prices, for a 4- or 6-core option
• have overt support from third party peripheral manufacturers
RGDS,
I clicked on the ad for the new Mac Pro and it is hard not to be impressed by the redesigned architecture. Yes, I understand the complaints about internal expandability, but I think that those complaints are misplaced. While Thunderbolt is not as convenient as pci-e slots and on-board slots for hard drives, the new Mac Pro looks like it will have considerably more processing power than any other desktop currently on the market based on its use of PCIe memory, a new operating system, optimized use of the graphics processors, and Thunderbolt expansion, all packed in a relatively tiny footprint.
I own a Mac Pro 3,1 which I recently upgraded with an SSD and an additional processor for a relatively low amount of money, so I do appreciate the ability to upgrade a Mac Pro. Given that the new Mac Pro far outstrips the demands that will be placed upon it by current software and the state of flux that the software world is in due to cloud computing, the new Mac Pro should be a viable machine for a number of years even without the ability to make internal upgrades. Complain all you want, but the new Mac Pro looks to be one of the most awesome desktop machines ever and continues Apple's tradition of innovation in design and function.
I own a Mac Pro 3,1 which I recently upgraded with an SSD and an additional processor for a relatively low amount of money, so I do appreciate the ability to upgrade a Mac Pro. Given that the new Mac Pro far outstrips the demands that will be placed upon it by current software and the state of flux that the software world is in due to cloud computing, the new Mac Pro should be a viable machine for a number of years even without the ability to make internal upgrades. Complain all you want, but the new Mac Pro looks to be one of the most awesome desktop machines ever and continues Apple's tradition of innovation in design and function.
What, slacking already, tired of repeating yourself ?
Why respond to a new New MP thread then, one with an OT even more silly than most previous ones ?
Is it because it's not 20 pages long yet ?
Feels good to rant sometimes, no ?
I don't think any announcement of MP changes created that kind of entertainment value .
That's a huge fan of OS 8.6 speaking .
As for ignorance, expectations and numbers - I got plenty of each .
So do all of us, don't we ?
As for counting past one - it's all I do . Looking at my account statement .
Logical thought that, and discuss what's relevant , I suggest .
Simple scenarios: MP customers; work and performance related only.
No gamers, nerds and other recreational users, no employees .
Neither will foot the bill or make Apple any money .
About 6 months from now there will be the new MP, 12-24 months from now it's expected to be compatible with any workflow, bug free and future proof . Software and external hardware need to be available, affordable and adjusted to future requirements, the ones the new MP is supposedly catering to .
Based on what we know right now, what do you think will be the cost/performance/compatibility value of the MP 6.x+ , compared to the current MP ?
I think it's impossible to say, and that's a first .
Personally I think it has more to do with MS not bringing anything to the table in many many years on top of languishing PC designs. They are actually relived when they can successfully tread water. Apple is the only real alternative unfortunately. The masses are not going Linux that is for sure. I like simplification but I don't think it is the driving force in the migrations. Lack of choice is a sore point for many with Apple gear. If you could really do a proper CTO with wide ranges of components most users would be much happier. Meaning they can still have the 13", 15", tower, all-in-one but you could dual core, quad core, Hex, Dual proc anything that can fit the stuff and cool it with small disclaimers regarding battery performance on specific configs. I think users can understand such things.
It's impossible to include cost in the equation because Apple hasn't announced it yet. But the performance and compatibility value of the 6,1 seems obvious to me. At least given the specs they named it's easy to get a basic understanding of what it's capable of and how it'll fit and configure - just on it's own standing. Once that's recognized it's fairly easy to compare that against "the current MP" (MP5,1).
Of course as written previously, pretty much the whole question teeters on the fulcrum of price-point - at least for me. If it's priced similar to the MP5,1 as some suggest then Apple will be officially dead to me.
I don't know about that.
In general, I do not think that the average buyer is really that conscious about the innards of the computer he/she is buying. My POW may be skewed and geographically limited, but when I look at the ads by which retailers and supermarkets sell computers it does really not seem like the average joe would be looking at the specs too closely.
This screen grab is of the e-paper version of local big electronics retailer advert - sorry for the language not being understandable for most of you, but you get the picture. The dearth of specs is astounding for someone who's into computers.
A second indicator is, that (I've been buying used mac hardware for years) the average person selling his old mac, is increasingly someone who neither knows nor cares how many gigs of RAM he/she has.
Naturally, Apple is the only one, who really knows, how many buyers use the existing CTO/BTO options, but (again) based on my "Fingerspitzengefühl" of what's out and about on the 2ndhand market, not many use the options. I'm sure you could argue that if Apple were to offer more options, more people would use them, but we'll never know.
Also, thinking back on all the people I know, who've transitioned from a wintel to a mac (and I can think of dozens who's transition I've had a hand in and maybe a hundred I've only spoken to), these are typically people who do really (and I mean r e a l l y) not care what's inside the machine, as long as it works.
RGDS,
What will you do..
I will speculate how this price thing will go down:
Apple will try very hard to come up with a price that is lower or equal to 2499. My guess is a 2299 or even 2199 for the base version, and here is why:
Apples main goal here is to make the MacPro more attractive to a semi-pro audience just the way they did with FinalCut Pro X.
Fact: Final Cut Pro X is a lot less expensive! I mean a lot! This is substantial folks, do not forget that.
Price: In Germany right now the price for a used 2009 single quad and a crappy NVidia 120GT with no extras (although in A1 condition) goes on ebay for about 900 - 1000 Euros. -> Now going for a 6 core xeon and EVGAs 680 upgrade will take another 1100 Euros. People like that will very fast hit the 2000 Euro marker, without even any SSD upgrade.
Apple knows this and they sure do not want to make the old MP 4,1 and 5,1 more attractive then the new 6,1. price wise. They have to maintain at least the same price point. In the past the MacPro sales numbers have been too small and too far away form the iMac product. If they wanted to go Full-Pro, they would have made this product right here:
http://www.promax.com/s-154-promax-one-tech-specs.aspx
But the did not!
The MacPro will be closer to the iMac on the price range this time. Since the iMac tops off on the $3500 marker we have an indication here. Thunderbolt Displays go for $1000 flat, subtract that from the iMac price you get the 2499 price wall right here. But they have to do something to attract more buyers not less! This has been the scenario in the past so far. To sell more and raise sales numbers, I promise you they will lower the entry price somewhat below the 2499.
Now letting really the air out of the MP6,1 this base version will come with two Nvidia 120GT-like graphics and maybe even a single quad core. Now you have a very easy price tag close to the 2000 marker.
This is at least what the could do. And remember, nobody said the base version would be a powerful machine... it was not in 2009..
I will speculate how this price thing will go down:
Apple will try very hard to come up with a price that is lower or equal to 2499. My guess is a 2299 or even 2199 for the base version, and here is why:
Apples main goal here is to make the MacPro more attractive to a semi-pro audience just the way they did with FinalCut Pro X.
Fact: Final Cut Pro X is a lot less expensive! I mean a lot! This is substantial folks, do not forget that.
Price: In Germany right now the price for a used 2009 single quad and a crappy NVidia 120GT with no extras (although in A1 condition) goes on ebay for about 900 - 1000 Euros. -> Now going for a 6 core xeon and EVGAs 680 upgrade will take another 1100 Euros. People like that will very fast hit the 2000 Euro marker, without even any SSD upgrade.
Apple knows this and they sure do not want to make the old MP 4,1 and 5,1 more attractive then the new 6,1. price wise. They have to maintain at least the same price point. In the past the MacPro sales numbers have been too small and too far away form the iMac product. If they wanted to go Full-Pro, they would have made this product right here:
http://www.promax.com/s-154-promax-one-tech-specs.aspx
But the did not!
The MacPro will be closer to the iMac on the price range this time. Since the iMac tops off on the $3500 marker we have an indication here. Thunderbolt Displays go for $1000 flat, subtract that from the iMac price you get the 2499 price wall right here. But they have to do something to attract more buyers not less! This has been the scenario in the past so far. To sell more and raise sales numbers, I promise you they will lower the entry price somewhat below the 2499.
Now letting really the air out of the MP6,1 this base version will come with two Nvidia 120GT-like graphics and maybe even a single quad core. Now you have a very easy price tag close to the 2000 marker.
This is at least what the could do. And remember, nobody said the base version would be a powerful machine... it was not in 2009..
You may want to use another example next time. FCPX is really a bad example since the product nearly killed that side of the business. People dropped it right and left and moved to Premiere or Avid. Hell, they even made fun of it on Jay Leno or The tonight Show, I can't remember which one of those two tv show it was.
As demonstrated with the E5 12 core and the two FirePro card, I don't see it being sold for less than $3k Cdn. More likely it will reach up to $3.25k or $3.5k
For example, the demonstrator has allegedly two W9000 ( Only reference model with 6gig of vram) detailing at $3,221.99 on Amazon. The CPU is also in the $1k ball park. Had the overpriced Apple PCIe SSD, the Ram and the design type and you are in the $9k+ realm.
----------
People don't really understand the concept of production machine. When a company purchase a bunch of computers, they want to get the most out of their investment. You don't replace a machine because a videocard isn't top end anymore or that the drives are to small for your need or the CPU aren't fast enough. These aren't PCs, these are workstation.
In my case, a simple upgrade of the video card, ram or HDD can double the work life of the machine. I wouldn't do it on a $500.00 secretary PC, but on a $4k+ workstation, you bet!
I agree, most people want a computer at a particular price point. That's why I'm slowly converting folks to Linux. It'll run smoother on lesser hardware, not cost you anything, and your doing something good for society. I'm typing this from the get acquainted laptop now running Mint 15. It's 1.83 core duo with a gig of 667 and for doing most normal tasks you'd just not know it's low spec.
There certainly is a lot of truth to the saying that: "It's more than just the hardware".
I booted up my 68040 Amiga 4000T the other day and the GUI and many image editing processes feel to be about the same speed as my 8-core MacPro running at 67 times the clock rate of the Amiga.
----------
Hmmm, that's an interesting speculation. At least there's some thinking applied. I kinda hope you right and wrong at the same time. I hope you're generally right but that you're still too high on the prices.
Well, hehe, I can hope ya?
There certainly is a lot of truth to the saying that: "It's more than just the hardware".
I booted up my 68040 Amiga 4000T the other day and the GUI and many image editing processes feel to be about the same speed as my 8-core MacPro running at 67 times the clock rate of the Amiga.
----------
Hmmm, that's an interesting speculation. At least there's some thinking applied. I kinda hope you right and wrong at the same time. I hope you're generally right but that you're still too high on the prices.
in the end most folks watch youtube, create documents, email, listen to music, and watch movies it'll do that with aplomb. Thats why I give it to people to try.
It's an IDEAL Facebook/youtube machine. Should be popular with the wedding video/insurance video "producers" as well. Should be able to render those snappy "spinning diamonds" transitions quite smoothly. Not everyone needs a dual cpu powerhouse.
And those sorts of productions are MUCH less likely to notice color gamut shifts that QT has become famous for.
in the end it was a statement in a round about way that for most people need to hit a price point and software can go a long way to help overcome lesser HW. Not a blanket statement.
I think you confuse software and operating systems .
OSX is a very demanding, and generally slow OS .
Demanding software , like pro editing apps, tend to be optimized for speed, even though these programs will always try to take advantage of whatever hardware is currently available .
Software developers aim for max productivity, while Apple and Windows OS developers just have to avoid major performance issues in mundane tasks .
I don't know what the price point of this going to be, and my current rMBP provides enough power for me, but with that said. I'm really impressed with the new Mac Pro. I'm sure given the features apple stated, its out of my price range but I really do like it.
So yeah, I'm probably in the minority but I can live with that. I've been in the minority in the computing world since the 80s given my affinity for apple products
So yeah, I'm probably in the minority but I can live with that. I've been in the minority in the computing world since the 80s given my affinity for apple products
If you have the new Mac Pro AND a separate external hd for raid configuration. That would STILL take up less space than the current mac pro or a PC Tower.
Also, i'm pretty sure more companies will start moving in the same direction as apple as far as expandability.
If I feel the need to upgrade, I can always sell the MacPro (which retains it's value much more than PC's) and make up the difference to purchase and upgraded model. That's much easier than buying parts and installing them.
I hated it then, and I hate it now.
But I can't wait till it comes out !!!
Why???? So the kexts from it can be released into the wild and I can build a dual-CPU Xeon Hackint0sh with full speedstep/sleep support.
Well, obviously you are right re. the pricing of the new MP .
Or rather what spec will come with which price tag .
But apart from that, I'm confused by what you said, and you avoided the question .
The MP6.x will not be cheaper than the MP 5.1, but who cares .
The MP can will of course need to be a lot more powerful than any current MP at the same price point .
Now, and not when or if possible GPU vs. CPU related performance gives it an edge a few years from now .
Of course, upgrade options , like RAM, internal drive(s) etc. will be priced very competitively .
Anyways, not the point .
Some existing internal hardware has to be used externally .
Actually, most of it .
No big deal . Or is it ?
Please keep in mind, I'm not talking about a MacBook or solitary iMac, we talk workstation environment .
Compatibility, performance, not optional .
Availabilty required, pricing negotiable .
Performance, check; availability, so-so .
Compatibility, unproven .
Pricing , between borderline affordable and outrageous .
Depends heavily on availability, required performance and compatibility .
The price of the new MP can, don't worry about it .
If it'll be something very silly, like a base model with 4x1GB RAM , 2.4 Quad, 128GB SSD and a cheap GPU (1 or 2 , who cares), the price won't matter . It sets the tone, a swan song .
No way Apple will get away again with a huge price gap between the low-mid-high end models .
They try, end of discussion .
Assuming he MP 6.can will be a great computer .
Peripherals, hubs, drivers for compatibility, cables that are loooong, cheap and work .
Assuming, as you claim, performance and availability already are no issue - how much is it to move from any former Intel MP to the can ?
Everyone avoids that question .
----------
Price point for what ?
A smart phone ?
I believe this is the MacPro forum , and web surfing doesn't count as demanding computing .
I really don't like the new MacPro.
http://www.giga.de/desktops/mac-pro-2013/news/mac-pro-2013-klotz-versus-messie-mac-pic-of-the-day/
http://www.giga.de/desktops/mac-pro-2013/news/mac-pro-2013-klotz-versus-messie-mac-pic-of-the-day/
I don't like the new MP, but...in 3-4 years I won't have a problem with a locked down trashcan. My 2010 6-core is barely a year old (go figure!). By 2016, my internal drives will be @ EOL and I wll be itching to replace my 30" ACD with a 50" 4K display. It will be a different world by then. Until then, however, I'll continue grating cheese