I'll probably buy the next iMac for home use. Email and such. But the nMP on my desk has been a disappointment and will be my last Mac for work uses.
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.
Mac Pro Rising
- Thread starter No One
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'll probably buy the next iMac for home use. Email and such. But the nMP on my desk has been a disappointment and will be my last Mac for work uses.
For Apple? You use what Apple dictates to you. For every other platform you use what works best for your application. Simple...eh?
[doublepost=1468452076][/doublepost]
This is an excellent point. If Apple doesn't provide direction on the Mac Pro (either with regular releases or communication) pro application developers may decide to move away from the platform. If I were the developer of a pro application I'd have to think hard about why I would continue to support a platform which hasn't seen an update in so long.
im just replying because i can, im not to prove anyone here right or wrong but in regards to the list you gave several things did become successful and some are still in use today
"Just like Apple invested a lot of R&D in Rhapsody - what became of that?" Rhapsody was developed into OS X
(there was nextstep openstep Rhapsody DR1 DR2 then OS X DP releases DP3 introduced aqua and there was the OS X 1.x server releases)"Just like Apple invested a lot of R&D in Yellow Box - what became of that?" Yellow box became Cocoa IIRC
"Just like Apple invested a lot of R&D in Blue Box - what became of that?" Blue Box became the classic environment in OS X through to tiger
Tiger was a long, long time ago.im just replying because i can, im not to prove anyone here right or wrong but in regards to the list you gave several things did become successful and some are still in use today
"Just like Apple invested a lot of R&D in Rhapsody - what became of that?" Rhapsody was developed into OS X
"Just like Apple invested a lot of R&D in Yellow Box - what became of that?" Yellow box became Cocoa IIRC
"Just like Apple invested a lot of R&D in Blue Box - what became of that?" Blue Box became the classic environment in OS X through to tiger
http://lowendmac.com/1997/red-box-blue-box-yellow-box/
My point isn't that all of those APIs completely died, but that the original concepts were never realized, and whatever eventually shipped was very different from the start - until a few years later it was replaced by something else.
And if you're building products against an API - "very different" is poison.
Last edited:
My two part answer.
1) According to the forum rules a member can ask another member for sources to back up their facts. So even with MacRumors believes the burden of proof is on you.
2) Than we have what is known as the burden of proof fallacy or "Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam" In which some one tries to shift the burden of proof to the other person claiming "If you can't prove me wrong, I must be right"
In fact checking 101, any un-named anonymous sources should be suspect as unreliable. As example:
Thats a lot of "If's"
Even you seem to be questioning the reliability of such an article. I would never use this as a source, even if it fit my narrative. As it would be scrutinized and torn a part as to its accuracy.
Last edited:
It could have been one word. A yes or no would do.
Are you really quoting forum rules instead of answering a simple question with a yes or no? Wow. Just... wow. I am truly flabbergasted.
Oh boy, here come the argument fallacy definitions.
Hey, man. I conceded I couldn't prove myself right. I thought that would lighten the mood but I guess that was a swing and a miss.
Perhaps I shouldn't have asked you if you can "prove" anything. Perhaps I should have just asked "do you think the nMP was/is a sales success?"
No burden of proof. Just discussion. Like I was doing - finding articles, linking up, replying to people. It's easy. We're all just speculating here. Nothing is at stake. No need to pull out the philosophy books. It was just a simple yes or no question. We're not in court. This is all for grins.
Clearly I've caused you distress or something. Forget I said anything.
Last edited:
Neither Obj-C or Swift is proprietary.
I don't know what's so hard about this to understand. I prefer the small form factor of nMP as long as it does what the cMP does, and it does. Apple did not make it slower. It had as many cores as before of the same type of CPU's, you could install as much memory as before, and you could have as many GPU's in full-size buses as before. And they made it smaller while keeping everything intact. My only issue was being forced into buying two GPU's, but I can live with that.
Not once have I seen such an argument. People complained about the missing internal hard drive slots and PCI-e slots. Nobody said that it's slower than what would have been. How could it? Uses the same components as before.
I have a bad feeling that Apple may keep the Xeon by introducing the iMac Pro, which they just put the Xeon in there with some soldered ECC RAM, but still the same hopeless cooling system with 1 or 2 down clocked "custom" FirePro GPU.
And of course, the price is about 3x normal iMac
Exactly, nMP is not a slow system at all, it may be missing the slots and bays, but in performance is as it should be.
One thing that many forgot is that when it was released it's ssd speed was phenomenal.
Sorry, I am not following the nMP's stuff very closely. The nMP can install 128GB RAM now?
True, I'm very pleased with my nmp. But I think the point most CMP fans are making is that were the tower format retained, they could have boosted their systems by now with better GPUs / faster SSDs internally at less inconvenience and expense.
This is pretty much irrefutable and tbh I can see why people would want a $3k+ computer to be upgradeable and last as long as possible.
Yes, it can, although when I checked the ram used at this density (32GB per DIMM) was of a lower clock speed than the 16GB DIMMS. This may have changed in the last year or so.
Wow, thanks, that's good to know. I don't even realise that 32GB DDR3 ECC DIMM exist. Now I wonder if it's possible to go for 256GB on the cMP. Or more then 56G on the single CPU cMP.
I don't really need that much, just curious will those sticks works in the cMP.
Update 1:
Just did a quick search, it's not as expensive as I thought. I can get it ~$135 per stick (Samsung DDR3-1333 32GB ECC REG CL9 Server Memory P/N M393B4G70DM0-YH9). However, it seems only 4RxR avail at this size, no wonder why the system are forced to run at lower speed (I mean even the clock speed is correct).
What surprise me is that I can even found a single 64G DDR3 ECC stick. That cost about $360 (Hynix 64GB DDR3-1600MHz ECC Registered CL11 P/N HMTA8GL7AHR4C-PBM2), but that's a 8Rx4 stick. I really doubt if a Mac Pro (both cMP and nMP) can be loaded this sticks without any issue.
Last edited:
nMP 7.1 that will be best iteration of current, can design:
- Same form factor
- Single socket, dual GPU setup
- Liquid cooling for GPUs, CPU and all the important parts of computer(PSU, etc)
- Internal, coherent fabric, that connects GPUs into single, bigger unit, and allows running both GPUs at 8x PCIe bus, leaving the rest of PCIe connection for TB3.
- Broadwell-EP CPUs.
- Dual HBM1/2 GPUs regardless of brand(preferable AMD because it will fit Metal better)
- Cheaper to buy, and more reliable under load.
- 500-550W PSU.
This is how Apple can improve current design.
Perfect computer for my, not huge needs is:
8 core CPU, 32 GB of RAM 2400 MHz, 512-768 GB SSD, dual Fiji XT clocked at 850-925 MHz, and water cooled.
For my work(video editing, web mastering, gaming it will be way more than enough).
- Same form factor
- Single socket, dual GPU setup
- Liquid cooling for GPUs, CPU and all the important parts of computer(PSU, etc)
- Internal, coherent fabric, that connects GPUs into single, bigger unit, and allows running both GPUs at 8x PCIe bus, leaving the rest of PCIe connection for TB3.
- Broadwell-EP CPUs.
- Dual HBM1/2 GPUs regardless of brand(preferable AMD because it will fit Metal better)
- Cheaper to buy, and more reliable under load.
- 500-550W PSU.
This is how Apple can improve current design.
Perfect computer for my, not huge needs is:
8 core CPU, 32 GB of RAM 2400 MHz, 512-768 GB SSD, dual Fiji XT clocked at 850-925 MHz, and water cooled.
For my work(video editing, web mastering, gaming it will be way more than enough).
I agree that a refresh of the current design is the most likely outcome.
I can't say I agree on water cooling through. This couldn't be implemented without significant changes to the shape of the case and its internals. It won't happen, I'd put money on it.
I can't say I agree on water cooling through. This couldn't be implemented without significant changes to the shape of the case and its internals. It won't happen, I'd put money on it.
Therein lies the problem with the nMP to people who want the capability of the cMP form factor. For them the nMP does not "do" what the previous cMP did. Are you now seeing why they're objecting to it?
It's slower than what it could have been had Apple retained the same capability of the cMP and upgraded the technology contained within. Yes the nMP has the equivalent number of cores as the older technology offered in the cMP. However had Apple upgraded the technology in the cMP to the nMP equivalent it could have twice the cores. Or the same number of cores at a lower cost (because two 6-core processors cost less than a single 12-core processor not to mention both processors will have a higher clock speed offer more performance than the single core offering). Twice the memory. Twice the PCI lanes.
[doublepost=1468495185][/doublepost]
I agree with this. The question is: Why hasn't Apple already done so? The parts are available all Apple needs to do is use them.
We can debate here, however... DP1.3 and 1.4 is what they might have wanted.
DP1.3 makes sense for 5K resolution SST. DP1.4 - 8K at 60Hz...
In the meantime they could have upgraded the processors, memory, and GPUs.
I'm not exactly sure of the cloud based development environment your talking about. I know Apple recommends only to use their software downloaded from their servers. Had problems before with downloading it from third party sites that injected malware into apps.
Yes, and that's not the same as it being "slower". I already said that for some people losing internal HD slots and PCI-e lanes diminished functionality.
If they offered 2x12 Core CPU's, yes. Apple probably would have offered 2x6 Cores BTO as before. When they released 2012 MP's, there were 8 Core Xeons available yet Apple did not offer 2x8 BTO's. Same with 2009 MP's. Why do you assume that suddenly in 2013 Apple would have offered the max amount of single cores per CPU?
Lower cost? So we are only paying attention to the cost of the CPU's and not to the boards that host 2 CPU's instead of one.
More like six times the memory.
The MP6,1 has 4 DIMM slots. A dual socket E5-26xx v2 can have 24 DIMM slots. (4 channels per socket, 3 DIMMs per channel)
All the apple specific and essential libraries are. Obj-c or swift without those is pretty much crap.
Then we need hear nothing more about how these people should accept the nMP.
Because the CPUs would be available.
Poor argument given the nMP lost that very motherboard and the savings were not passed along.
[doublepost=1468498561][/doublepost]
I didn't want to go down the theoretical path given Apple would probably only go four DIMMs per CPU.
I'm talking about an Apple managed and host web based development platform. No third party or malware involved.