Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

I was expecting the new Pro to be a rounded off version of the old, like a PowerMacG4

S

Siderz

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Nov 10, 2012
991
6
I was really expecting that the new Mac Pro would be just like an aluminium PowerMac G4, just the same Mac Pro design but a bit more rounded off.

They would have had a nice design and kept the expandability of the old (Or current?) Mac Pro*. People are saying the new Mac Pro is a revival of the G4 Cube, I always thought the Mac mini was supposed to be the G4 Cube but I've never seen anyone else say that.

Thought it would be worth discussing this, I was very surprised at a different material being used, it suites nothing else on my desk**...it won't look good next to people's MacBooks either...so what was Apple thinking?

qs-case.jpg


*On the other hand...it's very clear Apple doesn't want this kind of expandability so I don't know why I even dreamt of that.

**It's worth noting that I don't have a Mac Pro, but an iMac and MBA, however I hope to become a Mac Pro owner one day in the coming years.
 
Above is plastic Power Mac. Aluminum is G5 ;)
New one shares with Cube cooling and (maybe) expansion idea. In enhanced way. And it might end like Cube as well.
 
The Cube failed partially because you could still by a G4 PowerMac with ability to run better GPUs, more drives, more RAM, etc. Was flashy & beautiful but again, it didn't solve any problems, just make them.

Sort of like how a Corvette gets Dad in the showroom, then he realizes that he has a wife and kids and buys the Impala instead.

Maybe they kill off regular MP when the iBin comes out to avoid this issue?
 
MacVidCards said:
The Cube failed partially because you could still by a G4 PowerMac with ability to run better GPUs, more drives, more RAM, etc. Was flashy & beautiful but again, it didn't solve any problems, just make them.
Click to expand...

Cube's had an upgradable GPU and their max ram amount became standard on future PowerMac G4's. Barring room for only one hard drive, they were just as upgradable as a Digital Audio or Quicksilver.
 
I agree, the new iCylinder should be marketed like a G4 Cube and Apple should also offer a proper Mac Pro!! Maybe a smaller less industrial version of the Mac Pro. Atleast have the options to upgrade the standard stuff like RAM, HD's, video cards, Blue Ray/DVD-ROM etc...

I think there is a very good market for the iCylinder! But not as a replacement Mac Pro :cool: :p :D :apple:
 
Intell said:
Cube's had an upgradable GPU and their max ram amount became standard on future PowerMac G4's. Barring room for only one hard drive, they were just as upgradable as a Digital Audio or Quicksilver.
Click to expand...

pshaw

The space for GPU was too small.

The VRM board would infringe on any "large" card, even of that smaller era.

A GeForce 3 fit but it's contemporary of the time, the Radeon 8500 would not.

When the Radeon 9800 came out, it was at least an inch too long.

The Cube was VERY constrained by 3 factors in GPU:

1. Size - GeForce 3 or smaller. Also, it was AGP 2X. So when smaller Radeon 9600 came out, it wouldn't work as it was AGP 4X.

2. Power - the entire Cube lived from a tiny VRM for all power. First thing to go when you put in a larger CPU & GPU

3. Heat - GPU was on edge, nowhere near the thermal vent in center. Just sat there out of airstream and cooked.

The power thing was especially compromised by another Apple "Let's shove our new connector down everyone's throat no matter how little sense it makes" thing called an ADC connector. Their "one wire to power them all" idea had 23" Apple displays ALSO being powered via that tiny VRM board in form of pass through from brick. The ADC connector died a quiet death, but not before making lots of people buy expensive and otherwise useless DVIAtor adaptors.
 
MacVidCards said:
pshaw

The space for GPU was too small.

The VRM board would infringe on any "large" card, even of that smaller era.

A GeForce 3 fit but it's contemporary of the time, the Radeon 8500 would not.

When the Radeon 9800 came out, it was at least an inch too long.

The Cube was VERY constrained by 3 factors in GPU:

1. Size - GeForce 3 or smaller. Also, it was AGP 2X. So when smaller Radeon 9600 came out, it wouldn't work as it was AGP 4X.

2. Power - the entire Cube lived from a tiny VRM for all power. First thing to go when you put in a larger CPU & GPU

3. Heat - GPU was on edge, nowhere near the thermal vent in center. Just sat there out of airstream and cooked.

The power thing was especially compromised by another Apple "Let's shove our new connector down everyone's throat no matter how little sense it makes" thing called an ADC connector. Their "one wire to power them all" idea had 23" Apple displays ALSO being powered via that tiny VRM board in form of pass through from brick. The ADC connector died a quiet death, but not before making lots of people buy expensive and otherwise useless DVIAtor adaptors.
Click to expand...

People have crammed surprisingly big GPUs into the Cube. With a simple VRM move, you have access to almost any non-MDD G4 compatible video card. I've seen ATI 8500s and 9800s put into Cubes. The Cube's VRM board was well designed so that it was hardy and able to power different GPUs. If the GPU was a ADC card, it got its power from the ADC power lines instead of the VRM board. The thing that burned them out was upgrade CPUs that didn't have a VRM bypass to take power from the 24v rail. Most of the pre-1Ghz upgrades didn't have one. There is a heat vent directly above the GPU's slot. With a properly oriented GPU heatsink, there is a noticeable flow of air coming out of it. ADC screens use 24 volts, nothing more. They get that power directly from the power supply. It does not go through the VRM board at all. The VRM board does use some of the 24v input, but the majority of it is for use with a ADC screen. The Cube's power supply was designed to be 204 watts. A fully upgraded Cube uses about 75 watts under load and a 23" ADC uses a maximum of 70 watts. That leaves about 60 watts of left over energy.
 
Moving VRM board was NOT an easy thing.

There were kits to do it, but the long wires dropped current further.

I burned up a few VRM boards when I specialized in Cube GPUs.

I was the first to run a Radeon 9800 in one and first to create GeForce 3 with 128 Megs (Apple's were 64)

I even created first 5200 and 6200 (with help from my friend Arti) bringing Core Image to Cubes. I know them and their GPUs well. Not being able to reliably and easily put a Radeon 9800 or Radeon 9700 or Geforce 6600GT in one when you could put the same cards EASILY in a 2X or 4X AGP G4 took alot of the fun of Cube's away.

So even when the Cube could run a similar CPU to other G4s, it was always limited to GPU choices. If you read my post again, I mentioned that brick power was passed through VRM, even if not acted on by coils it was still alot of current running through small traces. A bunch of bad ideas together. I burned up several VRM boards before I finally scrapped my cube GPU biz.
 
MacVidCards said:
Moving VRM board was NOT an easy thing.

If you read my post again, I mentioned that brick power was passed through VRM, even if not acted on by coils it was still a lot of current running through small traces. A bunch of bad ideas together. I burned up several VRM boards before I finally scrapped my cube GPU biz.
Click to expand...

I never said moving it was easy, just simple. The ADC's 28v doesn't go through the VRM board at all. I've traced the lines and even tested the power with the VRM board removed. The Cube still gives 28v to the ADC slot power pins with the VRM board not installed.
 
I'm really excited to see where this computer goes. I really think Apple has put more effort than we know into designing this thing. They don't want to have another cube incident. Completely changing the design direction was a really good call.

The cube was just way ahead of its time just like the Next cube and maybe even the new Mac Pro. However, the chips are so efficient now that Apple can shove all that power into such a small space without any sacrifice.
 
BigJohno said:
Apple can shove all that power into such a small space without any sacrifice.
Click to expand...

I kind of wonder, what would you rather in terms of power; the computer being powerful, or yourself being powerful?

The new Mac Pro, with less expandability, makes us less powerful than the old one.
 
I liked Power Macintosh G3 B&W styling. Newer machines are much quieter though.
 
S'funny how most peeps of the PowerPC forum migrate over here as time goes on. ;D

At any rate, I love the new design, and I'll be buying one if it is within my price range. I've been driving this 2008 for too long, though still very much keeps up with what is asked of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back