I haven't been excited by an Apple desktop since the Cube came out, I'm pretty happy with the direction they went in with the new Pro
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.
The Mac Pro Criticism
- Thread starter Simplybetter
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I haven't been excited by an Apple desktop since the Cube came out, I'm pretty happy with the direction they went in with the new Pro
Hyperbole doesn't really help settle down the rancor on these message boards. Dense packing powerful boxes has been done by folks in the past. Evlolutionary, but revolutionary not even in the slightest. Some minor specifics of the implementation (e.g., the specific proporitions and the tube shape. that differnent ) The components and packaging not so much.
There is little to nothing to indicate that at all. There will be options (build to order options). Extremely likely not just one pair of customer GPU daughtercards. However, no signs at all for an open market of options.
Male cow droppings. Slinging this kind of manure around forums does nothing to cut down on the rancor.
And the hyperbole that Apple commonly uses only also fuels the blowback when they are so obviously false (" the iPhone defies physics ..." LOL. )
I'm predicting this thing starts at $3,499.
My 2012 iMac has two SSDs inside. All signs point to this new Mac Pro never having that capability. Ha.
My 2012 iMac has two SSDs inside. All signs point to this new Mac Pro never having that capability. Ha.
LMAO $3,499
Who cares if it dosen't have multiple SSDs inside. That is what external HDDs are for, and they are better than internal HDDs for most users.
Define 'Better'.
Having 6 disks inside my Mac Pro is better than having 5 out side of it.
I like the design, I like the forwardness of it.
I hate the fact it may be completely useless as an upgrade path from my current Mac Pro without spending way more than the equivalent PC.
I haven't been excited by an Apple desktop since the Cube came out, I'm pretty happy with the direction they went in with the new Pro
That's because it is the Cubes 2nd coming. Only round. You get that right?
----------
You can still like your iMac without throwing hate on what you do not understand.
I agree with you. I was replying to original post and they way I understood it was that single PCIe SSD would be enough. I disagreed with that (maybe I didnt understood it) - of course it makes more sense to have this amount of data external.
I quite agree with the OP, that the tone used by many of the early commenters have left me wondering ...
I agree, that Apple is probably expecting something like this, and has maybe been in some discussions with OEM hardware manufacturers.
What I expect to be in the works shortly:
- A nMP -form factor compatible external enclosure for some slot-type expansion cards (even for Thunderbolt 1, there are some) To allow all those who need software-specific expansion cards/legacy cards etc.
- a 3,5" / 5,25" storage expansion bay, with different capacities (number of drives) some with a RAID-option.
Do you honestly think Tim Cook makes these kinds of decisions alone and against everyone else's wishes?
Do you also think that you know Tim Cook's business better than he does?
Please...
AND
Looking at the pictures of the internal layout, I see no possibility for another CPU on what seems to be the logic board. That said, Considering that All Apple would have to do to fit another CPU would be to extend the logic board (and the chassis) by another inch or two, I cannot credit those who think the setup is doomed to be single-CPU.
That said, there is one very dangerous assumption being made by some here (and otherwheres) - that the 2nd,3rd and every subsequent iteration of the nMP will be bound by the foundation laid by this first version. To exemplify, It's just as if you had in 2006 complained about "only four cores".
According to everymac.com, it was US$3299, which basically means a base 2,66 quad with the CPU option - considering the measly base RAM (1GB) and HDD (250GB) which were still from the base set, I don't expect many actually left the shop only 3.3k$ lighter.
Me neither. If you compare the new chassis with the old one, I'm ready to bet good money the new will cost a lot less to manufacture. The biggest questions will be what kind of deal Apple has reached with ATI/AMD, Intel and blade storage suppliers.
Assuming that the 12core would be the BEST -option, then the BASE and BETTER options would be either quad and octo, quad and hexa or hexa and octo.
Making another assumption, that Apple is going to go back on one "promise" (that of dual GPU's in all setups), I'd guess Apple will aim at something like 1999 $ for the BASE version going up to 2999 $ for the BEST version, but Apple under Tim Cook's operative management has often shown itself capable of harnessing massive economies of scale, so I might even be positively surprised.
Finally.
Many have pointed out the clear connection between the Cube and the nMP and I full agree. While some may find this to discredit the nMP, I actually view it in the opposite manner. The mere fact that Apple did the cube and failed spectacularly with it is a good guarantee that Apple will be vary of making the same mistakes again. In my opinion, If post-Amelio Apple has shown anything, it's that they do not make the same mistake twice.
RGDS,
Single CPU. The processors Intel will be releasing later this year has a 12 core version.
The only thing I can see wrong with the Mac Pro, is the small amount of USB 3 ports, I struggle with the amount of USB 3 ports on the iMac .
Although I suppose if I could afford the Mac Pro and a display worthy of running it, then I wouldn't be using usb 3.
I would be going for thunderbolt 1/2.
.Although I suppose if I could afford the Mac Pro and a display worthy of running it, then I wouldn't be using usb 3.
I would be going for thunderbolt 1/2.
I cant recall "hating" anything...
And I can still like my iMac while criticizing a new product with quite obvious shortcomings.
----------
I hypothetically guarantee you that if you poll actual working "pros", The vast majority would prefe increased internal connectivity and expansion as opposed to a smaller desktop machine.
And before you call me a "hater", I am totally onboard with external drives to use in conjunction with my internal ones. I currently run an iMac with a 128GB SSD for boot, a 512GB SSD for scratch inside the thing. I have a 2x2TB firewire drives spanned for a 4TB time capsule. I have a 6TB Raid1 "working disc" through thunderbolt with a Seagate thunderbolt dock daisy chained that I use for off-site backup rotation.
I fully embrace thunderbolt and it's awesomeness. But I also support internal storage for various reason, off the top of my head including Desk cleanliness and pure space concerns, $$$ concerns, and removing the possibility of knocking power cords loose and frying a drive.
Of course you can. But I would not call the SSD a shortcoming.
You don't need 2 SSD's when you have 1TB density on PCI bus. 2x SATA3 SSD's are a bit slower than the single PCI based solution in the new Mac Pro anyway. Especially if they are the Apple Samsung 830's they sold as CTO. Heck 2 RAID0 TB connected SSD's are faster than the internal 2xSSD's in the iMac. Getting into the new Mac Pro will not require tearing out glue with a razor to get under the screen to move components around to access SSD's that require thermal sensors that have to be installed just right or the fans scream bloody murder. So they are different and should be. The real shortcoming is lack of internal expandability which your iMac suffers from as well.
----------
Heat, power, cost. Pick one. Maybe Apple wants you to buy 2 if you need 24-cores and 48-threads?
n00b
This, coming from someone who only registered YESTERDAY and has this as the very first post.
This, coming from someone who only registered YESTERDAY and has this as the very first post.
Spot on.This, coming from someone who only registered YESTERDAY and has this as the very first post.
Detestable is right. Never criticize the Apple. s/
It's called patriotism Simplybetter.
iThink, that the amount of idiots on this board is tolerable. MR has > 800.000 members @ the moment. Only a few dozen are complete idiots.
I know what I want - and two bespoke FirePro GPUs that look in no way replaceable, and at best require someone to come out with Mac-specific GPU cards to swap out with them are not what I want.
It's a nice machine, but its built for a very particular workflow, and that workflow isn't mine.
----------
This is a very narrow group of people who are raving about it. They all have a particular industry in common if I'm not mistaken. If you're like them, the Mac Pro might indeed be an outstanding choice for you.
If you're not, it's entirely possible its not.
The number of times it was mentioned that the Mac Pro is 4K capable makes me think we will be seeing a 4K Apple display to go with the release of the MP. The price of that might be just as scary as the computer.
But at 1/8th the size, the new MP will be a lot cheaper in material costs, and quite possibly in number of components, so hopefully we will be pleasantly surprised by the price.
But at 1/8th the size, the new MP will be a lot cheaper in material costs, and quite possibly in number of components, so hopefully we will be pleasantly surprised by the price.
This, coming from someone who only registered YESTERDAY and has this as the very first post.
The Apple Inc Apologist Crew has been mobilized. I see several of them on here today.
They extoll the joys of external peripherals, one even posted disturbing photos of an aborted....oh, it was a GPU with wires dangling off of it on a desktop, never mind.
Yes, new folk with carefully articulated "bullet points" singing the raptures of this new tech which we unthinking trolls can't comprehend.
Funny how they all showed up today, isn't it?
Sorry I should have explicitly looped this back into the more general context of the thread about why the new Mac Pro went in the direction it did.
That response " no HDDs because we don't need HDDs any more". That isn't right. Still need them. The necessity that they are inside of one single box is diminished. But I've seem more than a few threads not connect those dots. There are lots of folks using the "increasing data files" to boost the "everything in one box" line of thinking. Howver, at some point of growth, that factor reverses the 'direction' of the better matched solution.
