# WWDC - Surprises?



## CubaMark

*iFans – Modern and Sexy Mac OS X Banner Pictured at Moscone Center*



The banners are going up, and WWDC kicks off on Monday.... Rumours call for updated MacBook Air, all-new Mac Pro, iOS 7 and a preview of OS X 10.9.

Of course, when talk of 10.9 comes up, people are curious as to what it might be called... given the banner above, one guy thinks he has the answer:










(iFans)

Here are some links to websites covering Monday's WWDC keynote with liveblogs:


Apple's WWDC 2013 keynote happens Monday, get your liveblog here!
Live Blog: Apple's 2013 WWDC keynote
Liveblog: WWDC 2013 Edition
Liveblog: Apple's WWDC 2013 keynote
Please join us Monday at 10 AM PT for the WWDC Keynote
Apple's WWDC 2013 Keynote: Join Us For Live Coverage Monday


----------



## Macfury

I like "Sea Lion." Windows should copyright "Walrus."


----------



## Joker Eh

How about it being 11? The wave is washing away 10?


----------



## fellfromtree

I think Apple will drop the animal moniker. Where are they going to go- meerkat? Jony Ive is promoting a flat characterless OS, the moniker will reflect that.
iRadio announcement (though not for Canada)


----------



## Garry

New Mac Pro, New Macbook pros, IOS7, and a new appleTV


----------



## fjnmusic

Apple will reveal the new iRack, using a hologram of the late great Steve Jobs.

http://youtu.be/IeF8plqpjMM


----------



## pm-r

I hate to say so, but thanks. That's a good video.


----------



## FeXL

Garry said:


> New Mac Pro, ...


In some ways, this scares the hell out of me. Yes, the upgrade is long overdue but not at the expense of expandability. As long as I can add additional drive storage, memory and PCI cards without having to resort to external "expansion boxes", I'm in. If they go small form factor, my current MacPro will have to last a long time.


----------



## pm-r

How's this for an unsupported disclosure?

New 'Mac Pro' Image Pushed to Mac Sites - The Mac Observer

I always admired Apple and the MacPro users that I know, but I had to settle for less and loved the expandability of my still available and working dual-boot OS G4 MDD tower Mac.

But I sure hope that Ives and group and Apple don't carry on with their 'thin-is-in' thing with any new MacPro, and make any proper expandability awkward or impossible.

Like: only allowing some internal thin SD cards to be used as expandable SSDs, and with minimal USB and Thunderbolt only ports for any peripherals or multiple displays.

Unfortunately, I wouldn't be too surprised to see such implementations.


----------



## FeXL

Fairly ugly, isn't it?

Tough to put much stock in it though. I've seen a number of different cases on a number of different rumour sites. While they all seem to have their own twist, the common thread in the fabric is massive downsizing. <sigh>


----------



## Macfury

I call foul on that image. Apple wouldn't brag about the speed of file transfers "in a zip" right off.


----------



## Paul82

FeXL said:


> In some ways, this scares the hell out of me. Yes, the upgrade is long overdue but not at the expense of expandability. As long as I can add additional drive storage, memory and PCI cards without having to resort to external "expansion boxes", I'm in. If they go small form factor, my current MacPro will have to last a long time.


If they do go small form factor, which I think is pretty likely, the only real question is how small they go and thus how much internal expansion is sacrificed. My bet would be a lot... all the while justifying it by pointing to thunderbolt port(s) for expansion options.

On the bright side, there should be some good deals on refurbished/second hand models of the current generation Mac Pro... which if maxed out is still quite the beast, and could conceivably last quite a long time.


----------



## Macfury

Paul82 said:


> If they do go small form factor, which I think is pretty likely, the only real question is how small they go and thus how much internal expansion is sacrificed. My bet would be a lot... all the while justifying it by pointing to thunderbolt port(s) for expansion options.
> 
> On the bright side, there should be some good deals on refurbished/second hand models of the current generation Mac Pro... which if maxed out is still quite the beast, and could conceivably last quite a long time.


If they go small, then I predict few good deals on second hand and refurbished. There will be a move up to the best of the big boxes for the serious pros, and only a little movement on the lower end units.


----------



## pm-r

Macfury said:


> I call foul on that image. Apple wouldn't brag about the speed of file transfers "in a zip" right off.


What say?? 

You didn't know that Apple was incorporating all Zip and Jazz drive support with the new MaPros that they advocated and supported some years ago. 

And all one will need is a $240.00 TB cable adapter and an Apple only $80.00 enclosure type thingy to get it all working.

And oh yes, another Apple Store $20.00 utility to get it all supported and working.


----------



## Macfury

pm-r said:


> What say??
> 
> You didn't know that Apple was incorporating all Zip and Jazz drive support with the new MaPros that they advocated and supported some years ago.
> 
> And all one will need is a $240.00 TB cable adapter and an Apple only $80.00 enclosure type thingy to get it all working.
> 
> And oh yes, another Apple Store $20.00 utility to get it all supported and working.


Talk to me Jazz Drive!


----------



## fjnmusic

Sometimes it just warms my heart to even hear the word SCSI.


----------



## chas_m

I find it hilarious that the same people who were yelling and screaming at Apple for the better part of a decade for a "mini-tower" form factor now suddenly want plenty of internal expandability again or they will be "disappointed." Um ... the only way you're going to get both is if the "mini-tower" form factor is a TARDIS.


----------



## Macfury

chas_m said:


> I find it hilarious that the same people who were yelling and screaming at Apple for the better part of a decade for a "mini-tower" form factor now suddenly want plenty of internal expandability again or they will be "disappointed." Um ... the only way you're going to get both is if the "mini-tower" form factor is a TARDIS.


Who are the same people who changed their mind? I like the big box, I just want it to be cheaper.


----------



## Oakbridge

chas_m said:


> I find it hilarious that the same people who were yelling and screaming at Apple for the better part of a decade for a "mini-tower" form factor now suddenly want plenty of internal expandability again or they will be "disappointed." Um ... the only way you're going to get both is if the "mini-tower" form factor is a TARDIS.


Agree 100%

I'll add something to your comment. The majority of those screaming for plenty of internal expandability… have never, ever, expanded, save for RAM.


----------



## Joker Eh

Anyone still using these?


----------



## Joker Eh

fellfromtree said:


> I think Apple will drop the animal moniker. Where are they going to go- meerkat? Jony Ive is promoting a flat characterless OS, the moniker will reflect that.
> iRadio announcement (though not for Canada)


That is a good guess.


----------



## Joker Eh

It looks like this keynote will be streamed live. 

Apple's WWDC 2013 keynote to be streamed live on Apple TV (update: now on Apple's Events page, too)




> A new channel has just popped up on Apple TV for its WWDC 2013 Keynote, meaning that a livestream of the big event will be available for viewing there -- just like last time. The HD stream will kick off at 10AM Pacific time, and there's a chance you'll see it on Apple's Events page as well, if history repeats itself. You can also catch past extravaganzas at either spot (see the More Coverage link), and naturally, we'll have a full liveblog of our own -- so there's no chance you'll miss any of the fun.
> 
> Update: The WWDC 2013 Keynote livestream link has now arrived to Apple's Events page as well, though you might need to be on Safari with OS X 10.6 or later to watch it -- if the last event was any indication. You can try for yourself at the source link below.


----------



## robert

I think expandability is more relevant now than before.

With so much of what we use being digital (books, movies, music...) now, 4 drives in a Mac Pro is a must.

Regardless, any Mac Pro upgrade will be a welcome addition.


----------



## Macfury

Oakbridge said:


> Agree 100%
> 
> I'll add something to your comment. The majority of those screaming for plenty of internal expandability… have never, ever, expanded, save for RAM.


They've never added HDs or upgraded a graphics card? Everyone I know with a Pro does that.


----------



## eMacMan

chas_m said:


> I find it hilarious that the same people who were yelling and screaming at Apple for the better part of a decade for a "mini-tower" form factor now suddenly want plenty of internal expandability again or they will be "disappointed." Um ... the only way you're going to get both is if the "mini-tower" form factor is a TARDIS.


No! We were looking for an intermediate between the MP and the Mini, not a degraded Pro.


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> No! We were looking for an intermediate between the MP and the Mini, not a degraded Pro.


Exactly. This was for people who only wanted an intermediate machine with easily swappable HDs and upgradeable components. I have never heard a pro user cry for a smaller box.

Perhaps some people are expressing their own wishes and imaging others agree with them.


----------



## eMacMan

And here you have it!

The Joy of Tech :: A Jony Ive WWDC


----------



## FeXL

chas_m said:


> I find it hilarious that the same people who were yelling and screaming at Apple for the better part of a decade for a "mini-tower" form factor now suddenly want plenty of internal expandability again or they will be "disappointed."


I find it hilarious that the same people who make broad, sweeping generalizations like the one above don't have a clue if I've ever wanted a mini-tower or not.

Which, BTW, I've never been interested in...


----------



## Joker Eh

The Apple store is down. Hmm.... Are you guys going to get your wish today on a new MacPro?


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> I find it hilarious that the same people who make broad, sweeping generalizations like the one above don't have a clue if I've ever wanted a mini-tower or not.
> 
> Which, BTW, I've never been interested in...


Another "hilarious" catch-all pronouncement from the belly-button lint Apple guru.


----------



## screature

Oakbridge said:


> Agree 100%
> 
> I'll add something to your comment. The majority of those screaming for plenty of internal expandability… have never, ever, expanded, save for RAM.


I highly doubt that the majority have not added PCI cards to their MacPros. Personally mine are maxed out and I am far from being in the top/high echelon of MacPro users.


----------



## screature

chas_m said:


> *I find it hilarious that the same people who were yelling and screaming at Apple for the better part of a decade for a "mini-tower" form factor *now suddenly want plenty of internal expandability again or they will be "disappointed." Um ... the only way you're going to get both is if the "mini-tower" form factor is a TARDIS.


How do you know they are the same people... you been keeping track of names?


----------



## screature

.


----------



## CubaMark

*Apple's Livestream is now active...*

Apple - Apple Events - WWDC 2013 Keynote


----------



## Macfury

screature said:


> How do you know they are the same people... you been keeping track of names?


A (creepy) pet project I guess.


----------



## groovetube

screature said:


> I highly doubt that the majority have not added PCI cards to their MacPros. Personally mine are maxed out and I am far from being in the top/high echelon of MacPro users.


I have to agree. While the numbers may be quite small compared to the massive numbers buying consumer machines and gadgets, most of the pros I know using mac pros, often make full use of the internal expandability of the mac pro.

If Apple does come out with something modular, I'm sure they anticipate the huge backlash from the pro crowd, especially after final cut, and hopefully, they will have learned from it enough to design something that serves both needs.

It's one thing to fool with a piece of software, but another to give pros a real reason to ditch the machine and platform altogether.

That's my optimism speaking of course.


----------



## broad

anyone elses audio mangled? this is obnoxious


----------



## Kazak

Audio fine here.


----------



## broad

thanks. i turned the audio setting from "auto" to 16bit and it works fine now.


----------



## Joker Eh

AWESOME!!!! Full Display.


----------



## CubaMark

My audio, video is fine - except my #$%^&*( ISP is crapping out every few minutes. I've had three 3-minute outages so far, and we're only a half-hour in to this.... Damn Megacable.


----------



## CubaMark

One of my outages came just after the dude on stage made a joke about "Sea Lion"... what's the actual new name for OS X 10.9?


----------



## monokitty

CubaMark said:


> ... what's the actual new name for OS X 10.9?


OS X Mavericks.


----------



## Moscool

iBooks now on Mac
Three years after Kindle


----------



## Moscool

Nice power sharing features


----------



## Kosh

Whoever wanted a new Airport Extreme got it. Airport Extreme with 802.11ac.


----------



## pm-r

chas_m said:


> I find it hilarious that the same people who were yelling and screaming at Apple for the better part of a decade for a "mini-tower" form factor now suddenly want plenty of internal expandability again or they will be "disappointed." Um ... the only way you're going to get both is if the "mini-tower" form factor is a TARDIS.



Huh??? I don't ever recall anyone "...yelling and screaming at Apple for the better part of a decade for a "mini-tower" form factor... ".

I do recall some wishing for a semi-expandable Mac option and much cheaper than a Pro model, like half way between a MacPro and a iMac or a mini.


----------



## Kosh

Is he really showing off a cylindrical Mac Pro???


----------



## iMatt

No, that's a Bose subwoofer from the 20th anniversary Mac.


----------



## Kosh

New Xenons
Dual GPU
PCIE controller, 1.25GBPs read, 1.0GBps write
6 Firewire 2 ports
2 Thunderbolt 2 ports
supports 4K displays
LED lit inputs
HDMI port
Appears to have 2 Ethernet ports and 4 USB ports... 

Damn,... coming later this year.

I hope they at least post the specs of the new Mac Pro on their website, today. Along with some movies of this thing. Gotta see it in action.


----------



## pm-r

Oakbridge said:


> Agree 100%
> 
> I'll add something to your comment. The majority of those screaming for plenty of internal expandability… have never, ever, expanded, save for RAM.



I guess I'm not in your majority list, even though I couldn't justify the cost of a Mac Pro, even refurb or a good used one, but my last of the G4 MDD models had one PCI slot left open, four HDDs and a second CD/DVD DL optical added.

And it's still a somewhat workable Mac.


----------



## Macfury

I wonder if that cylinder would fit inside the cheese grater case?


----------



## FeXL

From CNET:



> 12:02 PM | by Josh Lowensohn They put it up next to the previous system, and it's dwarfed. *It's one eighth the volume, Schiller says.* Other things: it's got a build in handle. 6 Thunderbolt 2 controllers. All the IO also lights up when you're plugging it in. "This is without a doubt the future of the pro desktop." It's coming later this year, Schiller says. Assembled here in the U.S.


Bold mine.

Hmmm...

I guess if all you're using is PCIe Flash storage, you don't need a ton of space for good old hard drives. Of course, the Flash storage will be dependable, very inexpensive, easy to install & aftermarket available...


----------



## iMatt

So, purely out of curiosity (not being a Mac Pro user): 

If you were vehemently opposed to a small form factor Mac Pro before the announcement, are you just as opposed now that you've seen some specifics? Or did the announcement change your mind in any way?


----------



## John Clay

iMatt said:


> So, purely out of curiosity (not being a Mac Pro user):
> 
> If you were vehemently opposed to a small form factor Mac Pro before the announcement, are you just as opposed now that you've seen some specifics? Or did the announcement change your mind in any way?


I'm very intrigued - I've been wanting a small tower with proper graphics for years, as I'm not keen on replacing an iMac every couple years.


----------



## pm-r

Well I guess this live blog comment sums it up pretty well:

"TIM STEVENS 12:01 PM
Lights are up! No new MacBook Pros! "

Apple WWDC 2013 liveblog!

For some reason I couldn't get the live WWDC video broadcast to work, and just got some music being played.


----------



## screature

A black cylinder??? :yikes:

I will reserve judgement until I see one but what the hell is that! Looks like a garbage can.


----------



## WCraig

screature said:


> A black cylinder??? :yikes:
> 
> I will reserve judgement until I see one but what the hell is that! Looks like a garbage can.


The Mac Pail!


----------



## Paddy

Lots of unanswered questions....

How much internal storage on that flash drive? (IE: how much external storage will I need and how will all that work?) I have 4 internal drives now....

Price? 

Availability of Thunderbolt drive storage and Thunderbolt PCI options?

Is the internal flash drive and the RAM user-upgradable? Better be....

Need more data....


----------



## kloan

No big surprises here... just more underwhelming announcements from an increasingly disappointing company. The Mac Pro looks neat, but that's about it.

iOS7, slightly new skin, same old boring navigation and overall UI. OS X Mavericks, oh look, you can treat Finder windows like a browser.... hmm, that seems awfully familiar.... oh wait, I know why.... because WINDOWS has been doing it for years!

*yawn*

Oh well, at least the MBAs come with 128GB standard now... finally.


----------



## CubaMark

The new Mac Pro pics and a video are available here:

Next-generation Apple Mac Pro eyes-on at WWDC 2013 (video)


*(FYI it is a black cylinder - this was a display model behind a protective case) 
*





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






(engadget)


----------



## Macaholic

In a cheap, bottle-strewn motel room, somewhere in the California desert, Scott Forstall just shot his Apple TV to hell with a twelve-gauge. There were more than a few rips on skeuomorphism!

I like the look of iOS 7. Caught up with Android on some features, too. 

I was really hoping to hear Jony Ive speak, you know, *in "real time"* on stage but I guess it's no surprise given his apparent personality that he taped his appearance. Other than calling Jobs during the iPhone reveal, has he ever addressed people during a keynote??


----------



## pm-r

Wow!! That's quite a drastic change and design.

"Get a sneak peek at the dramatically
redesigned and rethought Mac Pro.
It’s the future of the pro desktop."

Don't forget to scroll up and down at:

Apple - Mac Pro


----------



## screature

CubaMark said:


> The new Mac Pro pics and a video are available here:
> 
> Next-generation Apple Mac Pro eyes-on at WWDC 2013 (video)
> 
> 
> *(FYI it is a black cylinder - this was a display model behind a protective case)
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +
> YouTube Video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (engadget)


If it comes available in a silver anodized aluminium version i.e., not black that would be a good thing. A shiny silver version, not such a good thing.


----------



## Macfury

iMatt said:


> So, purely out of curiosity (not being a Mac Pro user):
> 
> If you were vehemently opposed to a small form factor Mac Pro before the announcement, are you just as opposed now that you've seen some specifics? Or did the announcement change your mind in any way?


I am completely turned off by both the design and what it offers. It makes me depressed to see what Apple is becoming. This MacPro would look good sitting on Moonbase Alpha--in 1976.


----------



## screature

pm-r said:


> Wow!! That's quite a drastic change and design.
> 
> "Get a sneak peek at the dramatically
> redesigned and rethought Mac Pro.
> It’s the future of the pro desktop."
> 
> Don't forget to scroll up and down at:
> 
> Apple - Mac Pro


It certainly represents a drastic change in design architecture. The cooling seems to make sense but I wonder how much it is going to act like a vacuum sucking up all the dirt and dust that is around its underside.


----------



## ldphoto

I was rather underwhelmed bu the whole announcement. I don't like the directing things are going...

-New MB Airs: new processors, even longer battery life (do most users need that much battery life?). As far as I can tell, it still has the same colour-innacurate, low-res display (at least on the 11"). The 11" MBA display is still outclassed by many Windows Ultrabooks.

-OSX Mavericks. Nice incremental upgrade. Glad the finally fixed multi-display support. Nothing revolutionary here though.

-Mac Pro. I'm not liking this at all. I think many people wanted to see an updated pro that still features internal expandability for RAM, storage and GPU, which being willing to give up CPU upgrades and PCIe slots. Judging ny the size of that machine, I'm willing to bet that RAM may be upgradable; Flash storage probably not, and GPUs most certainly not, considering the engineering required to get the thermals right. Anything upgradable aside from RAM will almost have to be a proprietary card. In my opinion, the new Mac Pro is a mini on steroids, and I'm not too fond of that at all. Knowing how expensive PCIe flash is, that machine will most likely cost as much as the current Pro, if not more. Not to mention that the Adobe apps that many Pros use are optimized for nVidia CUDA cards, not AMD FirePro. Nice to see it built in the USA though.

iOS 7 looks good. It has the features needed to catch up with the competition and keep iPhone and iPad relevant. But in reality, the iPad and iPhone have such a huge market and social presence that the devices would keep on selling no matter what they did with it, just because that's what everybody else uses.

iRadio is just Apple's version of Pandora, and their "passwords in iCloud" feature is frankly scary from a security perspective.

While I didn't have my hopes up, I was hoping to hear some mention of Aperture 4.0. With today's release of Lightroom 5 by Adobe, it's clear now that Lightroom will be my tool for photo work going forward. And it's not clear hat I'll be running it on Apple hardware either...


----------



## FeXL

iMatt said:


> So, purely out of curiosity (not being a Mac Pro user):
> 
> If you were vehemently opposed to a small form factor Mac Pro before the announcement, are you just as opposed now that you've seen some specifics? Or did the announcement change your mind in any way?


The issue for me is not so much the small form factor, but the expandability/upgradeability. 
1) Can I put in extra (reasonably priced), dependable storage? I'd never heard of PCIe Flash storage before today, I understand it's a variation of SSD's. This is a fairly new product, how dependable is it? SSD's are still short on a track record & already high on cost.

2) Can I install PCI cards? 

3) Am I stuck with Apple's overpriced memory or can I tap into the aftermarket & install it myself? 

4) I still burn at least a couple hundred CD's/DVD's every year and don't see that changing anytime soon. I have two burners in my MacPro now. Does that mean I have to go external?

There are probably other questions, those are the ones that come to the forefront.

That said, they really didn't give us much to go on as far as MacPro's are concerned. Somewhat disappointing.


----------



## pm-r

screature said:


> It certainly represents a drastic change in design architecture. The cooling seems to make sense but I wonder how much it is going to act like a vacuum sucking up all the dirt and dust that is around its underside.


I'm sure there will be some sort of air filter option available in the Apple Store.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> 2) Can I install PCI cards?


From the photos provided at the link above (Apple's Mac Pro page), the answer would seem to be no... 



FeXL said:


> 3) Am I stuck with Apple's overpriced memory or can I tap into the aftermarket & install it myself?


Can't imagine that scenario... aftermarket RAM option should still be on the table.



FeXL said:


> 4) I still burn at least a couple hundred CD's/DVD's every year and don't see that changing anytime soon. I have two burners in my MacPro now. Does that mean I have to go external?


Yes. Again, judging from the copy and the images provided above, it's a fair guess that pretty much all expansion (storage, PCI cards, etc.) would have to be done via an external chassis plugged into Thunderbolt... yeah, that's going to p-off a lot of the Pro crowd...


----------



## ldphoto

FeXL said:


> The issue for me is not so much the small form factor, but the expandability/upgradeability.
> 1) Can I put in extra (reasonably priced), dependable storage? I'd never heard of PCIe Flash storage before today, I understand it's a variation of SSD's. This is a fairly new product, how dependable is it? SSD's are still short on a track record & already high on cost.
> 
> 2) Can I install PCI cards?
> 
> 3) Am I stuck with Apple's overpriced memory or can I tap into the aftermarket & install it myself?
> 
> 4) I still burn at least a couple hundred CD's/DVD's every year and don't see that changing anytime soon. I have two burners in my MacPro now. Does that mean I have to go external?
> 
> There are probably other questions, those are the ones that come to the forefront.
> 
> That said, they really didn't give us much to go on as far as MacPro's are concerned. Somewhat disappointing.


1) Looking at the internals on the Apple website, I think that's certainly a NO without going to Thunderbolt. PCIe flash storage has been around for a while, but it's so expensive that it's almost vaporware (Canada Computers | Solid State Drives | Intel 910 Series 400GB PCI-Express 2.0 x8 Solid State Drive (SSDPEDOX400G301))

2) Same as 1)

3) Probably; the animation shows what looks like standard DIMM form factor.

3) Yup, burners will have to go external.

To me the Mac Pro is a Xeon-based (single-processor only now) mini with dual high-end GPUs and lots of Thunderbolt ports.


----------



## monokitty

Ha, others beat me to it!



FeXL said:


> 1) Can I put in extra (reasonably priced), dependable storage? I'd never heard of PCIe Flash storage before today, I understand it's a variation of SSD's. This is a fairly new product, how dependable is it? SSD's are still short on a track record & already high on cost.


Nope - no internal PCIe slots. PCIe-based flash gives you read speeds at ~1250MB/s, blowing traditional SATA-based connected SSD's out of the water by more than twice over. From what we can gather today, the Mac Pro has one internal SSD connected via PCIe. (Storage amount to vary; I'm guessing 256/512/1TB versions and BTO's).



FeXL said:


> Can I install PCI cards?


Not internally. Thunderbolt 2.0 expansion boxes to follow.



FeXL said:


> Am I stuck with Apple's overpriced memory or can I tap into the aftermarket & install it myself?


The Mac Pro has 4 internal expandable RAM slots, using 1866 MHz ECC RAM.



FeXL said:


> I still burn at least a couple hundred CD's/DVD's every year and don't see that changing anytime soon. I have two burners in my MacPro now. Does that mean I have to go external?


Yup. The ODD is obsolete in Apple's eyes and has been for a while.


----------



## FeXL

Reminds me of the mainframe, an old IBM 370 running TOPS20, we had in university, all modular, too. 

A cabinet for the CPU, a coupla cabinets for RAM, a cabinet for the tape drive...


----------



## Paddy

FeXL said:


> The issue for me is not so much the small form factor, but the expandability/upgradeability.
> 1) Can I put in extra (reasonably priced), dependable storage? I'd never heard of PCIe Flash storage before today, I understand it's a variation of SSD's. This is a fairly new product, how dependable is it? SSD's are still short on a track record & already high on cost.
> 
> 2) Can I install PCI cards?
> 
> 3) Am I stuck with Apple's overpriced memory or can I tap into the aftermarket & install it myself?
> 
> 4) I still burn at least a couple hundred CD's/DVD's every year and don't see that changing anytime soon. I have two burners in my MacPro now. Does that mean I have to go external?
> 
> There are probably other questions, those are the ones that come to the forefront.
> 
> That said, they really didn't give us much to go on as far as MacPro's are concerned. Somewhat disappointing.


1. No internal storage - it's all external. The question is - how much capacity will that PCIe flash storage have? Just WHAT am I going to have to put on the external drives? Right now, my 4 internals are all big enough to run the OS, all my apps AND all my documents. I'm guessing that my whole work pattern would be forced to change with this...There are external boxen available now and I'm sure there will be more (and they won't look like cheese graters either  ) Thunderbolt External Drive, Expansions, Interface Solutions & Cables from OWC

2. Nope. External in a Thunderbolt box. Something like this, perhaps: Sonnet - Echo Express SE Thunderbolt PCIe Expansion Chassis *cough* *splutter*...$399 and up... (on the upside, unless you have very specific video requirements, those built-in video cards are going to be pretty amazing, from the looks of 'em)

3. Unknown - and certainly hope it's user-swappable.

4. Yup. That said, I rarely use my built-in optical drive now and don't think I've used the one in my MBP since I got it last June, other than to install a few odd bits of software which I still have on disk.

I agree that much remains unanswered - especially re: price and the internal storage/RAM questions. I get that they've decided we're going to have to move to a modular approach with add-ons - doesn't make me especially happy (my Mac Pro is already a bloody forest of wires out the back - 2 printers, hardwired ethernet, 4 external HDs, speakers, monitor (USB & DVI)...which brings me to another thought - I'd need an adapter to continue using my trusty old Dell 2407WFP monitor. 

Edit: (I'm sorry - I seem to be creating an echo in here...  but maybe some of the links will prove helpful)


----------



## pm-r

Being curious about the MP storage and using the fast PCI Express flash storage option, I was surprised to discover:

- PCIe SSDs have been shipping in the market since 2007.
PCIe SSDs guide on StorageSearch.com

- like a super fast car, it's going to cost a lot of bill!!

- it doesn't seem to be readily available and I had trouble finding any pricing.

Then I came across the out of stock PCI Express flash storage at 
Newegg.ca - OCZ VeloDrive 1.2TB PCI-E PCI Express x8 MLC Enterprise Solid State Disk VD-HHPX8-1.2T 

You better be sitting down when you see the one there:
OCZ VeloDrive 1.2TB PCI-E PCI Express x8 MLC Enterprise Solid State Disk VD-HHPX8-1.2T

$4,499.00
$3,499.00
Save: $1,000.00 (22%)

Wowzers!!!!

Yup, going fast takes a lot of coin!!!


----------



## FeXL

Thx all for your input.

That Sonnet box, $399 for a _single_ slot! I agree, the graphics card won't need upgrading often. I currently have 3 internal and anywhere up to 5 external drives running at any given time.

It's starting to sound very pricey just for peripherals. And not like they're going to be giving the MacPro away, either. Until further info comes out, I'm going to reserve judgement. At first blush, however, it sounds like a complete, expensive redo.

Mac Pail. That's f'ing hilarious...


----------



## pm-r

Methinks Johnny Ives and crew blew it big time on their "Pro" design, especially for any actual pro Mac user.   Very disappointing.


----------



## groovetube

It's interesting that they are giving a preview of something that's a ways from actual production. (unless I'm wrong on this)

Perhaps they learned from the final cut fiasco, and if the backlash is overwhelming, there's still time to tweak.


----------



## Fox

ldphoto said:


> I was rather underwhelmed bu the whole announcement. ...
> 
> -New MB Airs: new processors, even longer battery life (do most users need that much battery life?). As far as I can tell, it still has the same colour-innacurate, low-res display (at least on the 11"). The 11" MBA display is still outclassed by many Windows Ultrabooks.
> ...


I am more upbeat about the announcements than many of you. I wondered what new features they could add to ML to make me upgrade, and there were enough mentioned today to get my interest. For IOS 7, I liked the new features but not the new design so much. I have an iPhone 4, so I'm wondering if Siri will finally work on it.

The most important announcement to me was the new MBA. The increase in battery life is huge, and will make a big difference to me. The other speed improvements are nice as well. I don't know about the colour and resolution quality on the 11", but I'm pretty happy with that of the 13"; enough so that I don't crave a retina display. Still, I would have liked to see a new Haswell MBP retina announced. 

I have a 2011 13" MBA that I'll either be selling or trading up to get the new one.


----------



## Paddy

pm-r said:


> Being curious about the MP storage and using the fast PCI Express flash storage option, I was surprised to discover:
> 
> - PCIe SSDs have been shipping in the market since 2007.
> PCIe SSDs guide on StorageSearch.com
> 
> - like a super fast car, it's going to cost a lot of bill!!
> 
> - it doesn't seem to be readily available and I had trouble finding any pricing.
> 
> Then I came across the out of stock PCI Express flash storage at
> Newegg.ca - OCZ VeloDrive 1.2TB PCI-E PCI Express x8 MLC Enterprise Solid State Disk VD-HHPX8-1.2T
> 
> You better be sitting down when you see the one there:
> OCZ VeloDrive 1.2TB PCI-E PCI Express x8 MLC Enterprise Solid State Disk VD-HHPX8-1.2T
> 
> $4,499.00
> $3,499.00
> Save: $1,000.00 (22%)
> 
> Wowzers!!!!
> 
> Yup, going fast takes a lot of coin!!!


Yeah....don't know how they're going to make Mac Pros remotely affordable with prices at $3.82/GB for the PCIe Flash...(that's from iOFusion, last month)

Definitely the way of the future, though, judging by the various articles here:
PCIe SSDs guide on StorageSearch.com


----------



## John Clay

Paddy said:


> Yeah....don't know how they're going to make Mac Pros remotely affordable with prices at $3.82/GB for the PCIe Flash...(that's from iOFusion, last month)
> 
> Definitely the way of the future, though, judging by the various articles here:
> PCIe SSDs guide on StorageSearch.com


More than likely, it's going to be a blade SSD like on the newer laptops and iMacs.


----------



## groovetube

I'm reserving judgement on the mac pro for now, but I have to say it looks pretty sweet for now.

It would be nice to lose the shiny for the aluminum look, or at least partly.


----------



## monokitty

John Clay said:


> More than likely, it's going to be a blade SSD like on the newer laptops and iMacs.


...


----------



## pm-r

I know it's just a prototype, but is that just one extra SSD blade socket if you scroll between the 'storage' image as monokitty posted and the 'Graphics' image at the apple site: Apple - Mac Pro


----------



## John Clay

monokitty said:


> ...


Hah, must have missed that image.


----------



## Macfury

Cook is a real disappointment as CEO. No vision, just a bunch of fifth-rate ad copy spouting out of his mouth.


----------



## i-rui

Initially i was disappointed in the new Mac Pro. I will say that as a mac pro owner for the last several years my concern for getting a smaller footprint on the mac pro has been zero. That's my personal opinion, perhaps i'm in the minority, but if i do eventually upgrade to this new version I foresee several other units to house PCie cards and storage.... so I don't quite understand the use of making a mac pro smaller only to have to use more space (and power bricks) to run those units to get the full functionality. 

However, as i read more i am slightly intrigued. The thought process into the design is impressive (from a technical point of view - but not from a practical one.)

I think it's success will depend on the proliferation of thunderbolt, the performance of future peripheral storage units, and the price of these peripherals and PCIe SSDs.

Ultimately i think apple has made a play on the future of desktop design, but have defiantly missed the mark for the majority of owners in the present. I can't see myself getting one in the near future, but perhaps a few years down the line when prices come down and the expansion units work themselves out (i could see a dual PCIe/storage unit so those chassis can be combined into one unit being popular)


----------



## screature

FeXL said:


> The issue for me is not so much the small form factor, but the expandability/upgradeability.
> 1) Can I put in extra (reasonably priced), dependable storage? I'd never heard of PCIe Flash storage before today, I understand it's a variation of SSD's. This is a fairly new product, how dependable is it? SSD's are still short on a track record & already high on cost.
> 
> 2) Can I install PCI cards?
> 
> 3) Am I stuck with Apple's overpriced memory or can I tap into the aftermarket & install it myself?
> 
> 4) I still burn at least a couple hundred CD's/DVD's every year and don't see that changing anytime soon. I have two burners in my MacPro now. Does that mean I have to go external?
> 
> There are probably other questions, those are the ones that come to the forefront.
> 
> That said, they really didn't give us much to go on as far as MacPro's are concerned. Somewhat disappointing.





> 1) Can I put in extra (reasonably priced), dependable storage?


No I think not.



> I'd never heard of PCIe Flash storage before today, I understand it's a variation of SSD's.


They have been available for quite some time but at a premium cost. For example just go to OWC to see what is available now. It is solid state so it is as reliable as any SSD storage.



> 2) Can I install PCI cards?


No you can't unless you have a TB PCI card enclosure (external) of which there are a couple but again at a premium price.



> 3) Am I stuck with Apple's overpriced memory or can I tap into the aftermarket & install it myself


This is of yet unclear.



> 4) I still burn at least a couple hundred CD's/DVD's every year and don't see that changing anytime soon. I have two burners in my MacPro now. Does that mean I have to go external?


Most definitely yes.

It is definitely a Pro machine in terms of CPU's and GPU's just not what Pros expect in terms of internal upgrades, but then again if TB becomes the new normal then prices should come down and it shouldn't matter that much...

Time will tell.


----------



## monokitty

screature said:


> This is of yet unclear...


It's not unclear. The new Mac Pro has 4 standard RAM slots.


----------



## screature

i-rui said:


> Initially i was disappointed in the new Mac Pro. I will say that as a mac pro owner for the last several years my concern for getting a smaller footprint on the mac pro has been zero. That's my personal opinion, perhaps i'm in the minority, but if i do eventually upgrade to this new version I foresee several other units to house PCie cards and storage.... so I don't quite understand the use of making a mac pro smaller only to have to use more space (and power bricks) to run those units to get the full functionality.
> 
> However, as i read more i am slightly intrigued. The thought process into the design is impressive (from a technical point of view - but not from a practical one.)
> 
> I think it's success will depend on the proliferation of thunderbolt, the performance of future peripheral storage units, and the price of these peripherals and PCIe SSDs.
> 
> Ultimately i think apple has made a play on the future of desktop design, but have defiantly missed the mark for the majority of owners in the present. I can't see myself getting one in the near future, but perhaps a few years down the line when prices come down and the expansion units work themselves out (i could see a dual PCIe/storage unit so those chassis can be combined into one unit being popular)





> I think it's success will depend on the proliferation of thunderbolt, the performance of future peripheral storage units, and the price of these peripherals and PCIe SSDs.


I agree most definitely. TB has been possibly the slowest roll out of peripheral devices in the history of computing and with a ridiculous price premium. 

The performance is clearly there with TB2 especially and I don't see that as a problem. But price is king and thus far price has been prohibitive to adopt TB peripherals. 



> Ultimately i think apple has made a play on the future of desktop design, but have defiantly missed the mark for the majority of owners in the present.


Apple has been making it known for some time that they see the future as being TB in their consumer line, this is their first foray into the Pro market with TB, time will tell if Pros are willing to adopt it...

But realistically speaking if you want a Pro Mac going forward you need to adopt TB... or move to Windows. I think Apple is placing their bets on the OS and if you don't want to run Windows with the plethora of vulnerabilities you will bite the bullet and go TB.

I know I would have a hard time going back to Windows.

The main issue for me is the multiple terabytes of storage that I would have to incur the cost of being made to be TB friendly... a costly proposition at current prices.


----------



## screature

monokitty said:


> It's not unclear. The new Mac Pro has 4 standard RAM slots.


It is unclear whether or not they are *user upgradable*... did you see anything that made it clear? It certainly isn't on the Apple web site....

I didn't see the keynote, so if it was made clear there they should have made it clear on the website because at this point it isn't based on what is available at the website.

Oh and BTW why the need for the terse reply...

If it is clear to you show me where Apple says explicitly that RAM is user upgradeable and I will most humbly apologize, otherwise it is unclear.


----------



## Paul82

It's about what I expected as far as the Mac Pro goes, I'm happy enough with it, though admittedly I'm not a Mac Pro user, and if I were I'm not the type to be doing lots of upgrades....

The really big stuff in the keynote that impressed me was iOS 7, I'll reserve judgement until I actually get to play around with it, but it looks very promising in terms of the balance between familiarity and updating the UI to keep it from feeling stale. Also looks to have a number of solid improvements in terms of features, and the new multi-tasking model is going to be a big change for iOS, I just hope they can stick to the claim about not eating battery life up...


----------



## a7mc

Ok... I'm just going to say it. The new Mac Pro looks exactly like my garbage can. Sorry. :S
(that said, it is a clever design, but at the expense of aesthetics and upgradability in my opinion)

Also, iOS 7 is stunning... but looks the exact product of a Windows Phone/Android lovechild. So many things are just rip offs of other OSes. I can't see anything original in there other than a bit of "frosted glass" (and arguably, even that was ripped off from Vista). 

Sad to see... Apple is not the company it once was.

A7


----------



## CubaMark

I'm also waiting for details on iWork. This "iWork in the Cloud" thing may be useful as a challenge to Google Docs, etc., but... we're now 4 years without a significant upgrade (beyond simple compatibility updates) to the suite, and there is much that needs to be addressed...


----------



## monokitty

screature said:


> It is unclear whether or not they are *user upgradable*... did you see anything that made it clear? It certainly isn't on the Apple web site....


Based on the photos available from the Mac Pro (available here), it seems reasonable - at the moment - to suggest that the internal frame and body of the Mac Pro slides out from underneath its enclosure, exposing the four RAM slots for easy access by the end user. For certain? No, but it's very reasonable to assume that is the case based on the design suggested in the photos available. It doesn't look like you need to be a technician to slide the body out of its casing.

The original question was: _Am I stuck with Apple's overpriced memory or can I tap into the aftermarket & install it myself_.

You are not stuck with Apple's memory, and yes, you can tap into aftermarket RAM, and yes - user upgradable or not - you can install it yourself. Even if it isn't technically user upgradable (unlikely), you can still change it yourself.


----------



## RicktheChemist

a7mc said:


> Ok... I'm just going to say it. The new Mac Pro looks exactly like my garbage can. Sorry. :S
> (that said, it is a clever design, but at the expense of aesthetics and upgradability in my opinion)
> 
> Sad to see... Apple is not the company it once was.
> A7


I totally agree.. making a big deal about small things like iBooks.. who gives a hoot about iBooks on the Mac! The Mac Pro looks like a cheap piece of plastic.. I guess the price of aluminum has gone up and they have to give more money back to shareholders.. 

Quicktime streaming is also a pain in the ass.. choppy as hell.. and folks that work for Apple that think they are funny with cheap jokes.. 

RtC


----------



## Rps

So now where am I..... Do I wait for the iPad 5, cause we know it's coming or do I go out and buy a new Air 11 inch....I'm leaning toward the Air .


----------



## Thom

CubaMark said:


> I'm also waiting for details on iWork. This "iWork in the Cloud" thing may be useful as a challenge to Google Docs, etc.


Not much value for me. I spend half my time where there is no internet or cell device, so how would I do word processing and spread sheet work with no connection to iCloud?


----------



## screature

monokitty said:


> Based on the photos available from the Mac Pro (available here), *it seems reasonable* - at the moment - to suggest that the internal frame and body of the Mac Pro slides out from underneath its enclosure, exposing the four RAM slots for easy access by the end user. For certain? No, but it's very reasonable to assume that is the case based on the design suggested in the photos available. It doesn't look like you need to be a technician to slide the body out of its casing.
> 
> The original question was: _Am I stuck with Apple's overpriced memory or can I tap into the aftermarket & install it myself_.
> 
> *You are not stuck with Apple's memory, and yes, you can tap into aftermarket RAM, and yes - user upgradable or not - you can install it yourself. Even if it isn't technically user upgradable (unlikely), you can still change it yourself.*


But you don't know that for a fact, it seems reasonable I agree, but not knowing definitively if that is the case I stated the obvious, it is unclear...

Seems you would rather answer someone's question definitely when you don't know rather than answer truthfully that you don't know...

Sure it may be user upgradeable like the the previous gen Mac Minis of which few users were willing to take on the task (and probably which you profited from) the question was really pretty clear to me... How easily can I upgrade the RAM?

I said that it is unclear which at this point it is.

And for that you take exception?


----------



## screature

a7mc said:


> *Ok... I'm just going to say it. The new Mac Pro looks exactly like my garbage can.* Sorry. :S
> *(that said, it is a clever design, but at the expense of aesthetics and upgradability in my opinion)*
> 
> Also, iOS 7 is stunning... but looks the exact product of a Windows Phone/Android lovechild. So many things are just rip offs of other OSes. I can't see anything original in there other than a bit of "frosted glass" (and arguably, even that was ripped off from Vista).
> 
> Sad to see... Apple is not the company it once was.
> 
> A7


Yep I agree and said the same earlier,



screature said:


> A black cylinder??? :yikes:
> 
> I will reserve judgement until I see one but what the hell is that! Looks like a garbage can.


Also agree on that front.


----------



## pm-r

According to Topher Kessler who's usually a good accurate source, the RAM is no doubt fairly standard and user upgradable.

NOT so for the off the shelf SSDs nor the graphics card. Sorta dumb design to me.

"However, the RAM on the new systems will be upgradable. Apple has stuck with the traditional RAM slots, and provides four slots for adding more RAM modules to the system. Apple so far has not given any specifications on the provided RAM in the systems, but in its Core Technologies Overview it mentions that the kernel in OS X Mavericks supports addressing up to 128GB of RAM. "

How upgradable is the new Mac Pro? | MacFixIt - CNET Reviews


----------



## CubaMark

Here's a much better image of the new Mac Pro:












> The top of the device is designed to double as a handle, and the whole external casing slides off when unlocked to give access to internal components for swapping parts out. It doesn’t have the same kind of internal drive bays for traditional platter-based HDDs as the old silver aluminum behemoth it replaces, but


(Techcrunch)


----------



## CubaMark

*Here's a much better image of the new Mac Pro:*

(NOTE: here is a high-res image)












> The top of the device is designed to double as a handle, and the whole external casing slides off when unlocked to give access to internal components for swapping parts out. It doesn’t have the same kind of internal drive bays for traditional platter-based HDDs as the old silver aluminum behemoth it replaces, but


(Techcrunch)


----------



## groovetube

Hmmm. After thinking about this, all I can say is, it didn't work with the cube, why will it now?


----------



## Paddy

Thom said:


> Not much value for me. I spend half my time where there is no internet or cell device, so how would I do word processing and spread sheet work with no connection to iCloud?


A new version of iWork for Macs and iPads is also going to be released - you won't be forced on the Cloud. So far, they're not doing an Adobe. 

The neat thing about iWork for iCloud is that you can work on it on a Mac or a PC - in a variety of browsers.


----------



## Macfury

A nice Hackintosh is looking better and better.


----------



## CubaMark

Well.... this isn't likely to make some people very happy....

_Apple is using an alternative daughter card design for the system's flash drive. This means that you will not be able to get a 2.5-inch drive from OCZ, OWC, Intel, or other manufacturers and plop it in the system. While third-party replacements and upgrades may become available, as with the current MacBook Pro and MacBook Air they will likely be limited and few in number_.​ 
(CNET)


----------



## kloan

Ok, just watched a demo video on iOS7... looks a little better than I was initially thinking. The multitasking, control center, floating icons, Safari tabs all look like nice additions. Certainly a step in the right direction, and way better than iOS6.


----------



## jamesB

groovetube said:


> Hmmm. After thinking about this, all I can say is, it didn't work with the cube, why will it now?


What's this, the removable core design worked then and still works just fine in my Cubes.


----------



## pm-r

Yeah, as I was saying... NOT so for the off the shelf SSDs nor the graphics card. Sorta dumb design to me.


----------



## FeXL

CubaMark said:


> *Here's a much better image of the new Mac Pro:*


Bloody miniature black R2-D2...


----------



## eMacMan

While sizewise this may fill the huge gap between the Mini and the Pro, my gut feeling is it is going to come up short on the Pro user needs and be far too expensive to successfully satisfy the mid-range gap.

Kind of looks like some sort of tent heater.

I am sure things will become a little clearer in a few days or weeks.

If I was a production pro, chances are I would be buying now unless money and cable farming are not a problem.


----------



## John Clay

kloan said:


> Ok, just watched a demo video on iOS7... looks a little better than I was initially thinking. The multitasking, control center, floating icons, Safari tabs all look like nice additions. Certainly a step in the right direction, and way better than iOS6.


After using iOS 7 for a few hours, I can definitely say it is. There are many rough edges to iron out, but it's a massive step in the right direction.


----------



## talonracer

iOS Mavericks - because the iGoose is dead.


----------



## groovetube

John Clay said:


> After using iOS 7 for a few hours, I can definitely say it is. There are many rough edges to iron out, but it's a massive step in the right direction.


It's tempting to get it off of dev center, but I've never done a beta on my phone since you apparently can't go back, and have to update it when it expires.

But I am tempted this time round, just how rough around the edges is it?


----------



## Macfury

No racking this ugly puppy.


----------



## heavyall

All external expansion? Who is the idiot at Apple that actually LIKES having a spaghetti mess of cables? One of the big selling points of the Pro tower for professionals, is they can put all of the stuff they need in one box.

Also, isn't the current PCIe spec much faster than TB2? So SLOWER yet more expensive expansion?

Time to check into QUO more seriously.


----------



## kloan

John Clay said:


> After using iOS 7 for a few hours, I can definitely say it is. There are many rough edges to iron out, but it's a massive step in the right direction.


Looks like I'll need to finally get an iPhone 5 soon.


----------



## WCraig

As I said months ago, this was the logical next step for Apple. And it will be an insanely powerful machine:



> [The new Mac Pro} features a 12-core configuration based on all-new (E5) Intel Xeon processors, dual AMD-provided FirePro workstation graphics, new PCIe flash storage, new faster RAM, PCI Express gen 3 support, the ability to use up to three 4K-quality displays, and external outputs dominated by Thunderbolt 2. [Double the processing power of the current top-end Mac Pro]
> 
> ...new graphics system, allowing editors to work on multiple (up to three) 4K displays if needed.
> 
> ...twice the [memory] bandwidth ... of the existing model.
> 
> ...etc


New Mac Pro sneak-previewed at WWDC, coming later this year  | Electronista

The old Mac Pro was the red-headed step-child in the product lineup--this design is "Apple" through and through. I imagine it will be expensive but we don't know that for sure, yet. I expect they've described the top end model. Hopefully, there will be mid and entry-level configs that won't be out of the stratosphere. 

Craig


----------



## fairchild

monokitty said:


> ...


I looked down, and I think it moved :love2:


----------



## fairchild

monokitty said:


> ...


New Mac Pro with the gecko CPU, this thing is amazing!


----------



## Macfury

Here is another variant of the MacPro with handle extended, and optional tripod stand to assist cooling.


----------



## ldphoto

I just read on AnandTech that the new Air also uses PCIe flash storage, so it certainly looks like Apple has gotten the price point to come down a lot on those units. Considering the volume of Airs that are sold, getting 1TB of flash in the pro may not be as prohibitive as I expected.

I have to admit that for the first few hours after the keynote, I couldn't really wrap my head around why Apple would have designed something like this. But the more I think about it, it does make sense. In my case, last year, I replaced a 2008 8-core Mac Pro with a retina MBP. At the time (and still today), the rMBP is the fastest mac without a built-in monitor that supports modern interfaces. My work absolutely required a wide-gamut monitor, so the iMac was out of the question. The Mini has so-so graphics, and the current Pro lacks interfaces for fast file transfers to external drives.

I'm sure I'm not alone in already using TB for storage and displays; with the new Pro, it's an easy swap solution. I can take my Macbook out, put in the Pro, plug in my USB3 and Thunderbolt peripherals, and all my stuff is still there with minimal disruption.

I am very curious about pricing however. I don't really need the dual GPU, so hopefully there will be a lower-end model that won't cost a fortune. Wait and see I guess


----------



## fjnmusic

pm-r said:


> I'm sure there will be some sort of air filter option available in the Apple Store.


Maybe smokers could use this to help purify the air in their houses.


----------



## Oakbridge

RicktheChemist said:


> I totally agree.. making a big deal about small things like iBooks.. who gives a hoot about iBooks on the Mac!
> RtC


Small business for one. I create business manuals for my clients using iBooks Author. Great for those users who have iPads, but it has always been an issue for users that are Mac only. 

So I give a hoot about iBooks on the Mac.


----------



## pm-r

Oakbridge said:


> Small business for one. I create business manuals for my clients using iBooks Author. Great for those users who have iPads, but it has always been an issue for users that are Mac only.
> 
> So I give a hoot about iBooks on the Mac.


Ahhh???? Why not use something a bit more, and at least Mac OS X universal for your manuals?

I guess I'll never be reading any of them 'cause I don't have the hardware or software to view them.


----------



## pm-r

fjnmusic said:


> Maybe smokers could use this to help purify the air in their houses.


I'm a med-heavy smoker, but strictly outdoors only thanks. And I can't even stand the smell inside some Mac user's homes, and when attempting to clean some Macs inside such a smoker who smokes next to their Mac indoors, I nor the user could believe the sticky brown disgusting mess that was covering the insides.

One was so bad that it still had a virtually glued on about 1/32 or more of dust after a good brushing and multiple blasts with dust-off type spray.

I think that's about equivalent to an inch or so of good thermal insulation!! Not the best thing for any computer.


----------



## Oakbridge

pm-r said:


> Ahhh???? Why not use something a bit more, and at least Mac OS X universal for your manuals?
> 
> I guess I'll never be reading any of them 'cause I don't have the hardware or software to view them.


Care to explain?


----------



## Oakbridge

It's very telling that many (but not all) of those that have been most critical and insulting in this thread haven't bought anything new from Apple in years and wouldn't be a potential buyer of a $3000-5000 MacPro anyway, or are still using Snow Leopard (or earlier), and/or are using old iOS devices that aren't even capable of running iOS 7. It would be like me going on to a Android forum and complaining. 

I'd ask why they even bother complaining about something that they have no interest in buying/using but that will just give them more fuel for their pointless rants. 

I really wish they would stop wasting our time.


----------



## Macfury

Oakbridge said:


> It's very telling that many (but not all) of those that have been most critical and insulting in this thread haven't bought anything new from Apple in years and wouldn't be a potential buyer of a $3000-5000 MacPro anyway, or are still using Snow Leopard (or earlier), and/or are using old iOS devices that aren't even capable of running iOS 7. It would be like me going on to a Android forum and complaining.
> 
> I'd ask why they even bother complaining about something that they have no interest in buying/using but that will just give them more fuel for their pointless rants.
> 
> I really wish they would stop wasting our time.


I wish you would stop wasting our time with your pointless and relentless attacks on other members. This is not a MacFan site, but an open discussion of Apple products. Nobody is listening to your crotchety old man attempts to silence critics.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> I wish you would stop wasting our time with your pointless and relentless attacks on other members. This is not a MacFan site, but an open discussion of Apple products. Nobody is listening to your crotchety old man attempts to silence critics.


:clap:


----------



## iMatt

It looks like the bet Apple made on the MacBook Air all over again. At the time, many were very skeptical of, and some downright hostile to, the idea that people cared enough about the weight and thickness of a notebook computer. And even its defenders couldn't deny that the original Air was horribly underpowered and very expensive. But there were enough early adopters despite the obvious drawbacks, and here we are. 

This time the bet is on the modular desktop at the high end. People naturally worry about forests of cables, cost of expansion, is the I/O fast enough, do people really care that much about the footprint of their high end machine, etc.?

No doubt this new direction will alienate some people strongly enough to drive them to other platforms. Or maybe it will create a mini-surge in sales of the final cheese-graters. Or maybe there will be after-market docks shaped like conventional tower computers. 

But I wonder if there's a possibility that there is a big enough in-between market of people who find the Mini too minimal and the existing Pro form factor too much (in both footprint and internal upgradeability they know they'll never use) to more than make up for those who are driven away. I know I'd be reluctant to put a current Pro in a small home office. It's moot for me because mini/MBP/iMac type horsepower is adequate for me, but if I needed serious horsepower I know a honking big tower machine would be an annoyance.

I don't know if this will work out for Apple. But I don't think it's a completely crazy idea.


----------



## Gerk

Well I totally called the modular setup for the Mac Pro, but who knew it would be the love child of Darth Vader and R2D2. 

I think they definitely over-thought this one. Lots of pros are probably already scrambling to buy the last of the tower machines that Apple will probably ever make. No platter based storage bays == a horrible, horrible idea for a "pro" machine.

I'm wondering just how these fabled additional modules are going to work (or if Apple is even going to be making them or relying on 3rd parties to do it), and how they are going to look and/or stack with this new iGarbageCan ... Just can't picture how it's going to work having 3-5 full length PCIe cards in a cylinder, or 4-8 bays of platter based drive storage. If they do stack, once you stack up the bits that are missing from the upcoming Mac Pro it will be taller than the current tower (and in danger of tipping).

Also I have to say that I'm always a bit amazed how some people drink that Apple Kool-aid ... them presenting and making a big deal about things like "look at this fantastic _new_ option to see a "today" view, now this is something totally _new_," ... except that I could do this on a Palm Pilot in the 90's. New to iOS yes, but they make it seem like it's something innovative that they have invented. Funny enough a lot of the "new" little UI things are things that I've been doing on my Samsung phone running Android for a while now. I can just see the law suits flying already.


----------



## Gerk

Oakbridge said:


> Small business for one. I create business manuals for my clients using iBooks Author. Great for those users who have iPads, but it has always been an issue for users that are Mac only.
> 
> So I give a hoot about iBooks on the Mac.


I hear PDF is pretty good for that sort of thing and works on just about any device out there... ePub, not so much.


----------



## Macfury

I was certainly serious about my comments regarding rack mounting. How does the fashion cylinder fit into a serious workshop? Sitting at the edge of a desk? What keeps it secure?


----------



## Paddy

Some more background info that may be helpful:

AnandTech | Intel's Thunderbolt 2: Everything You Need to Know

Does anyone know if Apple has let drop the name of the Intel processors they're using? Given the reference to the Falcon Ridge processors coming later this year, I'd tend to believe that this is what they're using and that's one of the reasons - or maybe the prime reason - that we won't see the new Mac Pros until the fall.

MacWorld seems to think that the internal storage WILL be easily upgradeable.
The new Mac Pro: Hands on, and what you need to know | Macworld


----------



## Gerk

WCraig said:


> As I said months ago, this was the logical next step for Apple. And it will be an insanely powerful machine:


Not so much a powerful "machine" IMHO, it will have powerful CPU, GPU and RAM, but falls incredibly short on anything to do with storage or expandability. The only storage option it seems to have is the built-in SSD -- which means that "out-of-the-box" it's going to be pretty useless to pro users that need any kind of storage space (don't they all?). 

No option for internal storage == not a pro machine. Might as well be buying that Mac Mini you always suggest to people, at least THEY have the option for more than one storage device internally ... it's a pretty sad day when the Mac Mini has more internal storage options than the Mac "Pro" ... don't you think?


----------



## John Clay

Gerk said:


> Not so much a powerful "machine" IMHO, it will have powerful CPU, GPU and RAM, but falls incredibly short on anything to do with storage or expandability. The only storage option it seems to have is the built-in SSD -- which means that "out-of-the-box" it's going to be pretty useless to pro users that need any kind of storage space (don't they all?).
> 
> No option for internal storage == not a pro machine. Might as well be buying that Mac Mini you always suggest to people, at least THEY have the option for more than one storage device internally ... it's a pretty sad day when the Mac Mini has more internal storage options than the Mac "Pro" ... don't you think?


I don't know any pro that relies on internal storage - that's an absurd suggestion. External storage w/ USB 3 is cheap, plentiful and fast. There's simply no reason to waste space on internal bays that may sit empty for years.


----------



## groovetube

Gerk said:


> Well I totally called the modular setup for the Mac Pro, but who knew it would be the love child of Darth Vader and R2D2.
> 
> I think they definitely over-thought this one. Lots of pros are probably already scrambling to buy the last of the tower machines that Apple will probably ever make. No platter based storage bays == a horrible, horrible idea for a "pro" machine.
> 
> I'm wondering just how these fabled additional modules are going to work (or if Apple is even going to be making them or relying on 3rd parties to do it), and how they are going to look and/or stack with this new iGarbageCan ... Just can't picture how it's going to work having 3-5 full length PCIe cards in a cylinder, or 4-8 bays of platter based drive storage. If they do stack, once you stack up the bits that are missing from the upcoming Mac Pro it will be taller than the current tower (and in danger of tipping).
> 
> Also I have to say that I'm always a bit amazed how some people drink that Apple Kool-aid ... them presenting and making a big deal about things like "look at this fantastic _new_ option to see a "today" view, now this is something totally _new_," ... except that I could do this on a Palm Pilot in the 90's. New to iOS yes, but they make it seem like it's something innovative that they have invented. Funny enough a lot of the "new" little UI things are things that I've been doing on my Samsung phone running Android for a while now. I can just see the law suits flying already.


Totally agree on the over thought comment.

This is a pro machine, and most of the pros I know, care less about this sort of, cutting edge design than a well designed production machine with all the expandability required.


----------



## iMatt

Macfury said:


> I was certainly serious about my comments regarding rack mounting. How does the fashion cylinder fit into a serious workshop? Sitting at the edge of a desk? What keeps it secure?


Given the diminutive size the aftermarket dock idea is probably not farfetched. And of course such an enclosure would be rack-mountable.

Is it a silly, overkill solution to an unnecessarily manufactured problem? Maybe. But it's feasible.

I would also assume that Apple has done its homework and determined that rack-mounting high-end Macs is a relatively small niche. See also: death of Xserve.


----------



## Macfury

John Clay said:


> I don't know any pro that relies on internal storage - that's an absurd suggestion. External storage w/ USB 3 is cheap, plentiful and fast. There's simply no reason to waste space on internal bays that may sit empty for years.


I think the word "Pro" might mean different things to different people. I know people who use their MacPros professionally who use all of the internal bays. They may not be cutting movies for Hollywood on their boxes, but they use them to make a living.


----------



## John Clay

Macfury said:


> I think the word "Pro" might mean different things to different people. I know people who use their MacPros professionally who use all of the internal bays. They may not be cutting movies for Hollywood on their boxes, but they use them to make a living.


Sure - but they could very cheaply add USB 3 externals to augment internal flash. I'm not saying storage isn't critical, I'm saying *internal* storage isn't critical.


----------



## Gerk

John Clay said:


> I don't know any pro that relies on internal storage - that's an absurd suggestion. External storage w/ USB 3 is cheap, plentiful and fast. There's simply no reason to waste space on internal bays that may sit empty for years.


I don't know any pro that doesn't have at least 2-8TB of additional storage in their tower, even if it's just to mirror their boot drive (which is something I've suggested people do for years and has saved a lot of potential downtime and headaches on tight deadlines).

Here's something to think about ... how big are most Pro users boot drive + home folder for their main user (let along having multiple users on the machine which happens quite often)? Off the top of my head a ton of my clients would have problems just having their iTunes music collection + all their apps on a single SSD. Maybe my clients are different than who you are used to working with ... I dunno.


----------



## milhaus

It is apparently impossible for people here to let go of their ten year old concept of what a "pro" computer should be. Guess what, current desktops aren't selling to any audience - you can easily find the data yourself. Apple is skating to where the puck is going to be, and not where it was five minutes ago. If Apple had the amount of imagination you guys do, it'd be dead by now. 



Oakbridge said:


> It's very telling that many (but not all) of those that have been most critical and insulting in this thread haven't bought anything new from Apple in years and wouldn't be a potential buyer of a $3000-5000 MacPro anyway, or are still using Snow Leopard (or earlier), and/or are using old iOS devices that aren't even capable of running iOS 7.
> 
> I'd ask why they even bother complaining about something that they have no interest in buying/using but that will just give them more fuel for their pointless rants.
> 
> I really wish they would stop wasting our time.


I heartily agree. I don't see how they are calling you a curmudgeon, since they're the ones doing most of the whinging in this forum. I mean Jesus, guys, just look at your post history. Any sensible person would have shut up and moved platforms by now. 

Guess what guys, you're not Apple's priority right now. You can keep on complaining, or move to Android or the PC, where all of your needs can be met. As far as I am concerned, Apple's moving in the right direction - reading the market correctly and taking risks.


----------



## Gerk

John Clay said:


> Sure - but they could very cheaply add USB 3 externals to augment internal flash. I'm not saying storage isn't critical, I'm saying *internal* storage isn't critical.


How many of those users will be competent enough to do things like move their home directory off to an external USB3 drive? Also as I stated in a previous reply, you lose a crucial option of being able to RAID1 your boot drive + critical data (which is a super cheap no brainer with internal storage bays that can save you serious time if/when you run into problems with a drive).

Lastly external devices holding user folders ... not so great. accidentally kick/knock/pull out one of the 2-5 cables in the chain to hook up that drive -- blamo. Most times you won't even be able to save open files (even that are on other devices) because your whole home folder is gone.


----------



## HowEver

Actually, I agree. Many of those who 'miss' a computer 8 times the volume of the new Mac Pro probably don't have one and aren't going to be buying the new one.

As for me, I lament the lack of refresh for the MacBook Pro with Retina Display, but a 13" Air with 12 hours of battery life (or, you know, 8 real world or whatever it actually gets) looks interesting--first time ever I've said that about an Air product. They'll probably update the 15" Retina 3 weeks after I buy an Air...

iOS7, which I've been running for half a day now, isn't quite ready, but it sure as heck is NOT anything resembling Windows or Android, whatever people are saying. It has an Apple feel. And I really, really do NOT miss stitched calendering or green felt. Or even signal bars, which are now dots. Still learning about it, of course.

Oh, _*one more thing*_... iTunes Radio / iRadio absolutely rocks. It's a great great addition.


----------



## John Clay

Gerk said:


> I don't know any pro that doesn't have at least 2-8TB of additional storage in their tower, even if it's just to mirror their boot drive (which is something I've suggested people do for years and has saved a lot of potential downtime and headaches on tight deadlines).
> 
> Here's something to think about ... how big are most Pro users boot drive + home folder for their main user (let along having multiple users on the machine which happens quite often)? Off the top of my head a ton of my clients would have problems just having their iTunes music collection + all their apps on a single SSD. Maybe my clients are different than who you are used to working with ... I dunno.


Home folders are only massive when the users doesn't know/isn't shown how to manage it better - there's no reason for an iTunes library to be stored on an SSD, for example. It's pointless, and a waste of premium space.

If a user is properly managing their SSD storage, with non-essential files being stored on a different drive, then there's no issue moving to external storage.


----------



## groovetube

milhaus said:


> It is apparently impossible for people here to let go of their ten year old concept of what a "pro" computer should be. Guess what, current desktops aren't selling to any audience - you can easily find the data yourself. Apple is skating to where the puck is going to be, and not where it was five minutes ago. If Apple had the amount of imagination you guys do, it'd be dead by now.
> 
> 
> I heartily agree. *I don't see how they are calling you a curmudgeon, since they're the ones doing most of the whinging in this forum. I mean Jesus, guys, just look at your post history.* Any sensible person would have shut up and moved platforms by now.
> 
> Guess what guys, you're not Apple's priority right now. You can keep on complaining, or move to Android or the PC, where all of your needs can be met. As far as I am concerned, Apple's moving in the right direction - reading the market correctly and taking risks.


:clap::clap::clap:

(the bolded) Like really.

As far as the mac pro, I'm on the fence. I don't love it right now, but, I would agree that the future is the modular system. I just dislike the cylindrical case idea.


----------



## John Clay

HowEver said:


> Oh, _*one more thing*_... iTunes Radio / iRadio absolutely rocks. It's a great great addition.


Combining ad-free radio with an iTunes Match subscription is great - really adds value to iTunes Match for those that don't use it as often.

Too bad it's not in Canada yet. Wonder how long that'll take...


----------



## Gerk

John Clay said:


> Home folders are only massive when the users doesn't know/isn't shown how to manage it better - there's no reason for an iTunes library to be stored on an SSD, for example. It's pointless, and a waste of premium space.
> 
> If a user is properly managing their SSD storage, with non-essential files being stored on a different drive, then there's no issue moving to external storage.


So how many pros will actually _want_ a machine that can't even hold their iTunes music let alone working files for their current projects? I mean even firing up iMovie and importing a decent amount of footage will require external storage, let alone FCP, Logic or just about any other "Pro" app. To me that == an incomplete machine, it's only a partial solution to the pro needs. 

One of the single biggest complaints I hear about Macbook pros with SSDs are the fact that users don't have enough space to store things that they need. The same will hold true on this machine, so how many pro users are going to put up with that?


----------



## Macfury

milhaus said:


> It is apparently impossible for people here to let go of their ten year old concept of what a "pro" computer should be. Guess what, current desktops aren't selling to any audience - you can easily find the data yourself. Apple is skating to where the puck is going to be, and not where it was five minutes ago. If Apple had the amount of imagination you guys do, it'd be dead by now.
> 
> 
> I heartily agree. I don't see how they are calling you a curmudgeon, since they're the ones doing most of the whinging in this forum. I mean Jesus, guys, just look at your post history. Any sensible person would have shut up and moved platforms by now.
> 
> Guess what guys, you're not Apple's priority right now. You can keep on complaining, or move to Android or the PC, where all of your needs can be met. As far as I am concerned, Apple's moving in the right direction - reading the market correctly and taking risks.


You have a very narrow definition of imagination--i.e., what Apple chooses to deliver. Maybe their gamble will pay off and maybe it won't. Until then, yours is just another opinion, as welcome as those who believe the new models are in sad decline.

And yes, Apple's priority seems to be based on getting simpletons to become the newest members of the Apple consumer family.

This ululating about "why don't you switch platforms" is pretty embarrassing. Like telling people to leave the country if they don't like the direction in which it's going. It's a non-starter.


----------



## HowEver

Oh, it's here. Now.












John Clay said:


> Combining ad-free radio with an iTunes Match subscription is great - really adds value to iTunes Match for those that don't use it as often.
> 
> Too bad it's not in Canada yet. Wonder how long that'll take...


----------



## Stephanie

I'm certainly not among those the new Mac Pro is for, and I have kind of mixed feelings about the design they revealed. One thing that did cross my mind, seeing as it was a 'sneak peak' and all, is maybe Apple has some more plans for this that they haven't revealed yet.

I could see a matching black cylindrical 'base' that connects with TB2 cables and contains 4 or 6 drive bays. Or a mix of drive bays and PCIe slots perhaps? Now the 9" 'trashcan' Mac Pro becomes a 20" black obelisk. Granted, still not rackable, but stylish. 

Of course, a big factor is going to be how they price it, knowing that most pros who buy it will also have to buy add-ons immediately for storage, optical drives, etc.

On the software side, I'm most excited about how 10.9 works with multiple screens, and that a tv with Apple-TV can become an additional screen. My dual-head iMac will be able to become a tripple-head iMac as soon as 10.9 is out. 

As for iOS 7, I remember thinking it looked interesting, but today the only details I can remember that I liked were about the 'Control Center'. Most of the other stuff looked good but didn't really blow me away. The new 'look' will take a bit of getting used to I think.


----------



## John Clay

Gerk said:


> How many of those users will be competent enough to do things like move their home directory off to an external USB3 drive? Also as I stated in a previous reply, you lose a crucial option of being able to RAID1 your boot drive + critical data (which is a super cheap no brainer with internal storage bays that can save you serious time if/when you run into problems with a drive).
> 
> Lastly external devices holding user folders ... not so great. accidentally kick/knock/pull out one of the 2-5 cables in the chain to hook up that drive -- blamo. Most times you won't even be able to save open files (even that are on other devices) because your whole home folder is gone.


You lose no such option - you can create a software RAID1 (which is all you could do internally without the overpriced RAID card) just as easily with externals as internals.

Didn't say anything about moving your whole home folder over, either. That's beyond stupid.

Just iTunes, iPhoto, etc. Both have mechanisms built-in for handling external libraries.


----------



## John Clay

HowEver said:


> Oh, it's here. Now.


Oh, nice. Hadn't tried yet, since the announcement said US only. Wonder if that'll change at launch.

Edit: Don't have it on mine. Weird. Are you logged in with a US account?


----------



## FeXL

John Clay said:


> I don't know any pro that relies on internal storage - that's an absurd suggestion. External storage w/ USB 3 is cheap, plentiful and fast. There's simply no reason to waste space on internal bays that may sit empty for years.


What do you mean by "relies"?


----------



## Gerk

John Clay said:


> You lose no such option - you can create a software RAID1 (which is all you could do internally without the overpriced RAID card) just as easily with externals as internals.
> 
> Didn't say anything about moving your whole home folder over, either. That's beyond stupid.
> 
> Just iTunes, iPhoto, etc. Both have mechanisms built-in for handling external libraries.


Ok ... so you RAID1 the lightning fast internal SSD with a not-so-fast external and you will lose all of the performance gain of using the internal SSD.

So then I guess you also have to move the default Aperture library, FCP library (and scratch), the PS scratch, Lightroom library, etc.

Yes I will conceded it's doable, but who wants to have to do all of that on your main workstation(s)? Scarcity of storage space in a workstation == shooting yourself in the foot. And yes, again, I will conceded you can add a whole bunch of external USB3 drives (in crappy cases with crappy power supplies, etc) and use those, but at that point what's the point? Just buy a mac mini, it has better internal upgrade options


----------



## FeXL

Oakbridge said:


> ...wouldn't be a potential buyer of a $3000-5000 MacPro anyway, or are still using Snow Leopard (or earlier), and/or are using old iOS devices that aren't even capable of running iOS 7. ...


What kind of elitist crap is this, anyway?

Somehow, because I'm running 10.6.8 my opinion doesn't count?

Get over yourself...


----------



## partsguy

Looking at the new MacPro makes me think that if I had one of those, I'd want an iSub to put next to it ... (I'm not going to get any more technical than that, as I am a confirmed 'lap top' user.)


----------



## John Clay

Gerk said:


> Ok ... so you RAID1 the lightning fast internal SSD with a not-so-fast external and you will lose all of the performance gain of using the internal SSD.
> 
> So then I guess you also have to move the default Aperture library, FCP library (and scratch), the PS scratch, Lightroom library, etc.
> 
> Yes I will conceded it's doable, but who wants to have to do all of that on your main workstation(s)? Scarcity of storage space in a workstation == shooting yourself in the foot. And yes, again, I will conceded you can add a whole bunch of external USB3 drives (in crappy cases with crappy power supplies, etc) and use those, but at that point what's the point? Just buy a mac mini, it has better internal upgrade options


True, if you did a RAID1 for the boot. I've had enough bad experiences with OS X's software RAID that I only do clones of the boot drive.

There are plenty of semi-elegant multi-bay enclosures out there that are USB or Thunderbolt. Obviously the TB enclosures cost a ton, but the USB ones are pretty cheap. This is the first that comes to mind, but there are others I'm sure.

TowerRAID TR8UT+B - 8 Bay USB 3.0 / eSATA Hardware RAID 5 Tower w/ 6G PCIe 2.0 HBA (Black)


----------



## screature

groovetube said:


> Hmmm. After thinking about this, all I can say is, it didn't work with the cube, why will it now?


Well the cooling with the cube was passive whereas the cooling here is active so that is a big difference in terms of design, bit I know what you mean I was thinking much the same thing.


----------



## Gerk

John Clay said:


> True, if you did a RAID1 for the boot. I've had enough bad experiences with OS X's software RAID that I only do clones of the boot drive.
> 
> There are plenty of semi-elegant multi-bay enclosures out there that are USB or Thunderbolt. Obviously the TB enclosures cost a ton, but the USB ones are pretty cheap. This is the first that comes to mind, but there are others I'm sure.
> 
> TowerRAID TR8UT+B - 8 Bay USB 3.0 / eSATA Hardware RAID 5 Tower w/ 6G PCIe 2.0 HBA (Black)


RAID1 is pretty innocuous in terms of that, very simple to remove and re-add a device as needed (and it rebuilds in the background). SMARTReporter now also has built-in options to monitor software raid status. I've used this approach (and been setting up clients with it for mission critical hardware) for years and have never had anything more than a simple drive failure occur -- and when that did happen it was a simple matter of popping out the affected drive, putting in another, and then adding it back to the RAID set. This approach has saved significant downtime for both myself and some of my clients for the low cost of a single hard drive.

I've owned several of those Sans digital towers. They are ok, but their power supplies are not the greatest (and for some of them not standard power supplies so replacing them can be costly and time consuming) ... so just another point of potential failure. They are certainly nowhere near as good as the current Mac pro power supplies in terms of reliability.

Again having to add that sort of thing to your main workstation just to get things fired up is a crappy approach. Sorry, but I'm not drinking the kool-aid on this one .. but I will reserve final judgement until the fabled TB2 addon modules make their appearance. My prediction is that to get a setup similar to what you can do with current Mac Pro towers will end up costing 2-3 times as much, taking up just as much space, and give you many more points of failure (not to mention 2 additional power cables + 2 additional tbolt cables).


----------



## screature

Gerk said:


> So how many pros will actually _want_ a machine that can't even hold their iTunes music let alone working files for their current projects? I mean even firing up iMovie and importing a decent amount of footage will require external storage, let alone FCP, Logic or just about any other "Pro" app. To me that == an incomplete machine, it's only a partial solution to the pro needs.
> 
> *One of the single biggest complaints I hear about Macbook pros with SSDs are the fact that users don't have enough space to store things that they need. The same will hold true on this machine, so how many pro users are going to put up with that?*


Well I have always kept my OS/boot drive separate from working data having all data on other RAIDed external drives so this modular concept is nothing new for me and is actually the way I have worked for the last decade or so... so it may not be all that foreign a concept to other pros as well.


----------



## Gerk

screature said:


> Well I have always kept my OS/boot drive separate from working data having all data on other RAIDed external drives so this modular concept is nothing new for me and is actually the way I have worked for the last decade or so... so it may not be all that foreign a concept to other pros as well.


Yes but you do this by choice and I can assure you that this is not the "norm" on the Mac Pros that I service for clients. With the new setup there will be no choice in the matter!


----------



## Joker Eh

No new displays were mentioned. They created a new display for the iMac last year but no separate display yet. Is that it for extra display from Apple? if I want to get a 27" iMac and add a second display I have to get a mismatching display.


----------



## screature

Gerk said:


> Yes but you do this by choice and I can assure you that this is not the "norm" on the Mac Pros that I service for clients. With the new setup there will be no choice in the matter!


Agreed. But just saying once you get used to it, it works perfectly well... And even better than keeping your data on the boot drive as well in terms of security and down time in the case of drive failure, at least in my experience.


----------



## HowEver

Yes, no new displays were mentioned by Apple yesterday, so Apple is done with new displays.



Joker Eh said:


> No new displays were mentioned. They created a new display for the iMac last year but no separate display yet. Is that it for extra display from Apple? if I want to get a 27" iMac and add a second display I have to get a mismatching display.


----------



## chimo

With respect to stacking:

Judging by the airflow of these tubes, I don't think they will want to stack the Mac Pros. You would not want the warm exhaust air of one device to be the intake air of the second. Nor would you want to restrict the exhaust air of the lower device. Not to mention that it would not be mechanically stable unless the base was large enough.


----------



## Chimpur

Was thinking... Maybe theres a new Thunderbolt Display coming... and it can have some form of expansion abilities to hold updated graphics, hard drives, PCIe or whatever cards.... You need a monitor anyways; so why not use some of the space behind it to house that kind of stuff?


----------



## MacAddict

Let's come down to earth about this Mac Pro. To those Pros who actually use the current Mac Pro I would like to pose the question as to what do they envisage the price of the basic edition of this Wonder Mac is going to be ? I personally would give a stab at it being close to double what the existing maxed-out Mac Pro would be. 

Incidentally, I noted too that Apple carefully chose their wording on the "Designed in California, 'assembled',( not manufactured,) in the USA."


----------



## Oakbridge

Gerk said:


> I hear PDF is pretty good for that sort of thing and works on just about any device out there... ePub, not so much.


I'm not looking at PDF. I'm looking at ways to offer more than just text. If a picture is worth a thousand words, what is a 2 minute step by step video worth?

I've been answering a lot of support questions recently (i.e. how do I do...) by creating a quickie little screen recording using QuickTime or Camtasia or ScreenFlow (still haven't decided on one). 

ibooks Author allows me to quickly and easily create a customized manual for my clients, most of whom are 3-10 employees and who could never afford or justify having someone create business workflow manuals for them, yet their users are constantly working through dog-eared crib notes and cheat sheets of instructions that they need to follow to complete simple business functions (i.e. month end routines, specialized functions that they use 1-2 times per year, etc.) Writing long lists of instructions is good, showing them step by step using a screen capture is even better. 

I do appreciate PDF's and have a lot of manuals as PDF's on my iPad right now in the iBooks app. So I'm not against the use of PDF's, but once you've created a document that includes video for a customer, you want to do it every time.


----------



## Oakbridge

Gerk said:


> So how many pros will actually _want_ a machine that can't even hold their iTunes music let alone working files for their current projects? I mean even firing up iMovie and importing a decent amount of footage will require external storage, let alone FCP, Logic or just about any other "Pro" app. To me that == an incomplete machine, it's only a partial solution to the pro needs.
> 
> One of the single biggest complaints I hear about Macbook pros with SSDs are the fact that users don't have enough space to store things that they need. The same will hold true on this machine, so how many pro users are going to put up with that?


Pros + iMovie 

The demographic for this box_*will*_ be using pro apps. Now here's where I admit that I'm not as knowledgeable as some of you are about this, but with TB2, doesn't the internal vs. external argument with regards to storage go out the window? A pro app user needs storage, lots of it. With up to 36 TB devices, won't they have plenty?


----------



## Oakbridge

FeXL said:


> What kind of elitist crap is this, anyway?
> 
> Somehow, because I'm running 10.6.8 my opinion doesn't count?
> 
> Get over yourself...


You may be using 10.6.8 due to a technical limitation (i.e. running software that can't run on current OS and has no replacement that does run on a current OS) and if so, you were not part of the group I was referring to and therefore I would value your your opinion.


----------



## FeXL

MacAddict said:


> Let's come down to earth about this Mac Pro. To those Pros who actually use the current Mac Pro I would like to pose the question as to what do they envisage the price of the basic edition of this Wonder Mac is going to be ? I personally would give a stab at it being close to double what the existing maxed-out Mac Pro would be.
> 
> Incidentally, I noted too that Apple carefully chose their wording on the "Designed in California, 'assembled',( not manufactured,) in the USA."


The last two MacPro's I purchased from Apple ran somewhere around $4000. While they were not entry models, they weren't top end, either. Neither had extra HD's or RAM, they may have had a small vid card upgrade or wifi. In the past, that seems to be about the mid range price, no matter what generation we're talking about. I typically added another $1000 or so in RAM & HD's to each box.

If Apple prices a new midrange MP in that same area, but then we have to purchase TB cases for PCI cards, TB cases for HD's/whatever & have to pay an exorbitant amount for memory, BTO or aftermarket, for several thousand more, I'm not interested. 

If $5000 can't get me a workable system, I'll use this one as long as I can, maybe buy refurb, maybe buy something used, maybe go elsewhere.


----------



## groovetube

Oakbridge said:


> Pros + iMovie
> 
> The demographic for this box_*will*_ be using pro apps. Now here's where I admit that I'm not as knowledgeable as some of you are about this, but with TB2, doesn't the internal vs. external argument with regards to storage go out the window? A pro app user needs storage, lots of it. With up to 36 TB devices, won't they have plenty?


If you read his post, I think he was saying, even a consumer app like iMovie... much less a pro app...


----------



## FeXL

Oakbridge said:


> You may be using 10.6.8 due to a technical limitation (i.e. running software that can't run on current OS and has no replacement that does run on a current OS) and if so, you were not part of the group I was referring to and therefore I would value your your opinion.


Thank you.


----------



## Kosh

Paddy said:


> Does anyone know if Apple has let drop the name of the Intel processors they're using? Given the reference to the Falcon Ridge processors coming later this year, I'd tend to believe that this is what they're using and that's one of the reasons - or maybe the prime reason - that we won't see the new Mac Pros until the fall.


I saw one person on another forum comment that it has to be a Xenon E5 due to the number of cores and the throughput requirements of Thunderbolt and the Graphics cards.



> E5 is 12 cores, while E3 is still only 4 (and unlikely to grow beyond that), but I think the most important reason is PCIe. This box requires an insane amount of bandwidth between the CPU and GPUs, and then you need a few more for Thunderbolt. A Xeon E3 has 16 PCIe 3.0 channels for the CPU, plus another 4 from the PCH. An E5 has 40 channels from the CPU and still 4 from the PCH (I think). Apple is dedicating the full 16 channels to each PCIe card which leaves it 12 channels for everything else. 6 Thunderbolt ports would use all of those 12 channels, but they somehow need to use one for the SSD. Perhaps that is the reason for putting the SSD on the GPU - they're using that bandwidth?
> 
> Or maybe Ivy Bridge-EP adds a few channels


----------



## Kosh

Looks like I may have bought my last Mac Pro. Looks like my next desktop machine will be a MacBook Pro. I was already pondering this, though, as I don't need the power any more of a Mac Pro. 

I love the design of the new machine, but I hardly use my Mac Pro these days. I use my iPad and MacBook Pro more. I may be better served with 2 Macbook Pros and the iPad, or 1 Macbook Pro and 1 iPad. The iPad is showing it's age, though, time to get a new one.


----------



## WCraig

Gerk said:


> ... falls incredibly short on anything to do with storage or expandability. ...


As Apple says: 


> In creating a pro computer for the future, we wanted to provide an enormous amount of expansion — *without being limited to the space inside the enclosure.* Designed with built-in Thunderbolt 2, USB 3, Gigabit Ethernet, and HDMI 1.4 ports, Mac Pro sets a new standard in flexible, high-performance expansion. It’s our most expandable Mac yet. And it has everything you need to build a workstation completely customized to what you need and how you work.


Apple - Mac Pro 
[Bold mine]

Craig


----------



## Macfury

WCraig said:


> As Apple says:
> 
> *In creating a pro computer for the future, we wanted to provide an enormous amount of expansion — without being limited to the space inside the enclosure. *


Which computer was "limited by the space inside the enclosure" to begin with? Even back to the days of SCSI I could hook up external drives.


----------



## WCraig

Gerk said:


> ...you can add a whole bunch of external USB3 drives (in crappy cases with crappy power supplies, etc) and use those, but at that point what's the point? Just buy a mac mini, it has better internal upgrade options


Come on, there are multi-bay drive enclosures out there, you know. Say you wanted an 8-bay RAID enclosure with TBolt connection:

Areca ARC-8050 8-Bay Thunderbolt to 6Gb/s SAS RAID... in stock at OWC

Rather than being stuck with however many bays are in your current Mac Pro, you choose the storage that works best for your requirements. Or two 4-bay units. Or one 4-bay that has dual high-speed optical drives. ...

And, BTW, you can boot from the external if you really want. 

Craig


----------



## Macfury

WCraig said:


> Rather than being stuck with however many bays are in your current Mac Pro, you choose the storage that works best for your requirements. Or two 4-bay units. Or one 4-bay that has dual high-speed optical drives. ...


You could always do that. I was never "stuck" with the internal storage. It was a great option.


----------



## WCraig

Macfury said:


> Which computer was "limited by the space inside the enclosure" to begin with? Even back to the days of SCSI I could hook up external drives.


Right. So why should Apple bother designing space, power and cooling for the inside of a Pro?

Craig


----------



## eMacMan

WCraig said:


> Come on, there are multi-bay drive enclosures out there, you know. Say you wanted an 8-bay RAID enclosure with TBolt connection:
> 
> Areca ARC-8050 8-Bay Thunderbolt to 6Gb/s SAS RAID... in stock at OWC
> 
> Rather than being stuck with however many bays are in your current Mac Pro, you choose the storage that works best for your requirements. Or two 4-bay units. Or one 4-bay that has dual high-speed optical drives. ...
> 
> And, BTW, you can boot from the external if you really want.
> 
> Craig


Again where did any one get the idea that storage was limited to the 4 internal drives on a MacPro. FW 2 has done the job for a few years and before that FW 1 was at least adequate for many needs. Yep even good old SCSI fit the bill for many years.

Simply add Thunderbolt ports to the current MP cheese grater box and you have all the high speed external expandability any one could want, without sacrificing the internal drives for those who do not need any more than that.


----------



## Macfury

WCraig said:


> Right. So why should Apple bother designing space, power and cooling for the inside of a Pro?
> 
> Craig


Because it was convenient, elegant and cut down on clutter. I still love it.


----------



## WCraig

Macfury said:


> You could always do that. I was never "stuck" with the internal storage. It was a great option.


So, how much internal storage is the right amount? You want Y bays; Joe manages the animation rendering farm and doesn't want any; Sally serving the monster database wants 12 or more. Who should Apple make happy?

Craig


----------



## Macfury

WCraig said:


> So, how much internal storage is the right amount? You want Y bays; Joe manages the animation rendering farm and doesn't want any; Sally serving the monster database wants 12 or more. Who should Apple make happy?
> 
> Craig


Me.


----------



## pm-r

Oakbridge said:


> Care to explain?


I thought you explained the problem yourself when your wrote "...using iBooks Author. Great for those users who have iPads, but it has always been an issue for users that are Mac only. "

I for example only have Mac computers, and no iDevices that would work.


----------



## Gerk

Oakbridge said:


> Pros + iMovie
> 
> The demographic for this box_*will*_ be using pro apps. Now here's where I admit that I'm not as knowledgeable as some of you are about this, but with TB2, doesn't the internal vs. external argument with regards to storage go out the window? A pro app user needs storage, lots of it. With up to 36 TB devices, won't they have plenty?


In theory ... but at the end of the day there's a couple of things to consider:

1) there's barely any thunderbolt devices out there (and the ones that are out there are overpriced), and as for thunderbolt 2 it's not even out yet so it may be a while until we see any devices built on it. A Pegasus 4 bay thunderbolt RAID enclosure is $1100 on the apple store (with 4 1TB drives). You can get a FW/USB/eSata based enclosure with 4x1TB drives for less than half of that price wise. The FW and USB ones will be slower than the tbolt one of course, but eSata would be just as fast and very economical (if only Apple would embrace this standard instead of insisting on reinventing the wheel with their own stuff).

2) Price is definitely a factor. Given that the current Mac Pro comes with 4 full 6G sata channels you could consider that as part of the deal. With the new setup you're looking at adding a considerable amount to the purchase price and an additional external unit to get back to where things _used_ to be ... bad news for IT budgets everywhere. This new unit is basically providing 1/3 of the "pro" needs (being fast CPU/GPU/RAM). The rest of the needs have just been basically ignored. And yes, you _could_ add a PCIe chassis, if you can afford it -- a Magma 3 slot PCIe (full length) thunderbolt chassis is also around $1100 (with thunderbolt cable). ExpressBox 3T | Magma

I just used iMovie as a simple example (not saying that pros are using it per se) ... but change that up for FCPX and the size requirements get even larger again. Basically I was trying to point out that for most "pro" users they would have to add at least one external drive unit of some sort to this box before they could even start working on projects. For that matter most prosumer users would also have to add external storage before it's a usable box.

Again this might change depending on what Apple delivers in terms of additional modules, or for that matter _if_ they even bother to have additional modules. They may just leave that up to third party makers -- most of which have not even bothered making standard thunderbolt external stuff -- so who knows what will happen there.


----------



## jamesB

eMacMan said:


> Again where did any one get the idea that storage was limited to the 4 internal drives on a MacPro. FW 2 has done the job for a few years and before that FW 1 was at least adequate for many needs. Yep even good old SCSI fit the bill for many years.


Mmm! FW 2 or FW 1, can't believe I missed these . :lmao:


----------



## Gerk

WCraig said:


> As Apple says:
> 
> Apple - Mac Pro
> [Bold mine]
> 
> Craig


With an infinite budget and once the products are actually available, maybe. You could say exactly the same thing about your beloved iMacs and Mac Minis then as well ... they may not have thunderbolt2 but they do have thunderbolt ... and lo and behold, it will cost you a freakin' bundle just to add 4 drive bays (that are included in the current Mac Pro lineup) -- and the choices are abysmal in terms of what you can get hardware wise. You get the Promise Pegasus ... and .... well ... the Promise Pegasus (which as I pointed out in an earlier post is more than double the price of other options).


----------



## ldphoto

Like everything, there are multiple shared of grey here, it's not just black or white. There are different levels of "Pro" users out there, among others.

1) You have the cutting-edge video and audio producers that require all sorts of inputs and outputs and specialized interfaces. for those people, the new machine is going to be a disappointment.

2) You have the photographers, graphic designers, animators and other creative pros that really just need a super stable machine with lots of RAM, a decent GPU that can run 2-3 displays, and expandable storage. Many of these people are already using external storage solutions, either because four bays are not enough, or because going external makes it easier to move content from one system to another. In most cases, the glossy, standard-gamut display on an iMac makes them a non-starter. In some cases, these people have moved to using high-spec MBPs rather than Mac Pros, because the external interfaces on the current Pro are too slow. I'm squarely in this category, and for people like me, the new Mac Pro could make sense depending on pricing (and a single-GPU option would probably be enough).

3) You have the academic, scientific, medical and engineering folks that are looking for the most computing power they can get, with the *nix compatibility. If the pricing on the new pros comes in near what HP or Dell charges for a top-spec workstation (which isn't cheap!), the reduced footprint of the Mac Pro will make them a very good choice, with good OpenCL support for GPU computing tasks.

4) You have the high-end pro-sumer folks, whose budget is rather flexible, and who want the latest and greatest because it's new, and it looks cool, and it's top of the line. they will never use more than 25% of the capabilities of the machine, but hey, it's still a sale for Apple. These are the same people that would also buy a 4K display to use with iMovie  Apple is great at attracting this type of buyer. These people would never have bought the old beast of a Mac Pro.

In my experience, the users that fall within the categories 2), 3) and 4) outnumber those in 1). I'd say apple is playing to the majority (in an already small niche), realizing that they can't please everyone all of the time.


----------



## WCraig

Macfury said:


> Me.


Joe and Sally say: "Too bad, so sad."



Craig


----------



## Macfury

WCraig said:


> Joe and Sally say: "Too bad, so sad."
> 
> 
> 
> Craig


Joe and Sally can go to hell--along with MacPail!


----------



## Paddy

Kosh said:


> I saw one person on another forum comment that it has to be a Xenon E5 due to the number of cores and the throughput requirements of Thunderbolt and the Graphics cards.


I think I got muddled with Intel's naming schemes. The TB controller is called "Falcon Ridge" - the processors are indeed the Xeon E5s - and there are E7s on the horizon too, though there is no mention of those appearing in the Mac Pros. 

xeon | PC Perspective



> IDF: Intel Announces Upcoming Haswell and Ivy Bridge-E Xeon Processors
> Subject: General Tech | April 10, 2013 - 04:14 PM | Tim Verry
> 
> Intel officially announced its next-generation Xeon processors at IDF Beijing today. The new lineup includes the Haswell-based Xeon E3 1200 V3 family on the low end, and the Ivy Bridge-EP Xeon E5 and Ivy Bridge-EX Xeon E7 aimed at the mid-range general purpose and high-end HPC markets respectively. Intel did not disclose pricing or details on the new chips (such as core counts, cache, clockspeeds, number of SKUs etc.). However, the x86 chip giant did state that the new chips are coming later this year as well as teasing a few tidbits of information on the new Xeon chips.


----------



## Gerk

WCraig said:


> Come on, there are multi-bay drive enclosures out there, you know. Say you wanted an 8-bay RAID enclosure with TBolt connection:
> 
> Areca ARC-8050 8-Bay Thunderbolt to 6Gb/s SAS RAID... in stock at OWC
> 
> Rather than being stuck with however many bays are in your current Mac Pro, you choose the storage that works best for your requirements. Or two 4-bay units. Or one 4-bay that has dual high-speed optical drives. ...
> 
> And, BTW, you can boot from the external if you really want.
> 
> Craig


Yep you can buy that enclosure for $1500 if you want to spend that kind of money in addition to the bundle (and who knows how much it will be) that you will likely have to spend on your CPU module. And then you can spend another $1100 on a 3 slot PCIe chassis as well.

Lastly who says you are "stuck" with however many bays in the current Mac Pro? There are tons of options (and more affordable than the thunderbolt unit) for attaching additional storage to a current Mac Pro. Apple is touting this like it's the second coming having thunderbolt 2 on a Mac Pro ... and honestly at this point it doesn't mean squat.

Now if Apple actually builds affordable tbolt2 addon modules that might change the game, but at this point who knows where things will be going.


----------



## Macfury

Gerk said:


> Yep you can buy that enclosure for $1500 if you want to spend that kind of money in addition to the bundle (and who knows how much it will be) that you will likely have to spend on your CPU module. And then you can spend another $1100 on a 3 slot PCIe chassis as well.
> 
> Lastly who says you are "stuck" with however many bays in the current Mac Pro? There are tons of options (and more affordable than the thunderbolt unit) for attaching additional storage to a current Mac Pro. Apple is touting this like it's the second coming having thunderbolt 2 on a Mac Pro ... and honestly at this point it doesn't mean squat.
> 
> Now if Apple actually builds affordable tbolt2 addon modules that might change the game, but at this point who knows where things will be going.


From my perspective, this is like saying your car will no longer come with passenger seats, so that it can be made more compact--then crowing that it leaves the choice of how many passenger trailers to attach to the car up to you.


----------



## Gerk

Macfury said:


> From my perspective, this is like saying your car will no longer come with passenger seats, so that it can be made more compact--then crowing that it leaves the choice of how many passenger trailers to attach to the car up to you.


Indeed.


----------



## monokitty

Gerk said:


> There are tons of options (and more affordable than the thunderbolt unit) for attaching additional storage to a current Mac Pro.


You make it sound like the new Mac Pro can only use Thunderbolt add-ons. You can use USB 3.0 and FireWire add-ons with the revised Mac Pro, too.


----------



## screature

One thing I just noticed about the design of the new MP is that the way the case is designed and that the cover pulls off the top all cables will have to be unplugged in order to get inside (say to up grade the RAM).

To me this is a design flaw you don't have to do that with the existing MP.


----------



## ldphoto

Gerk said:


> With an infinite budget and once the products are actually available, maybe. You could say exactly the same thing about your beloved iMacs and Mac Minis then as well ... they may not have thunderbolt2 but they do have thunderbolt ... and lo and behold, it will cost you a freakin' bundle just to add 4 drive bays (that are included in the current Mac Pro lineup) -- and the choices are abysmal in terms of what you can get hardware wise. You get the Promise Pegasus ... and .... well ... the Promise Pegasus (which as I pointed out in an earlier post is more than double the price of other options).


Actually, a quad-core Mac Mini is a pretty decent choice for those using their machine for photography and graphic design. The quad-core i7 model is faster than the quad-core Mac Pro, and the upgrade to 16GB RAM costs about 120$. Add a 4TB Western Digital TB Duo drive for 500$, and you have a pretty nice little system that allows you to hook up any monitor you want.

The new Mac Pro is in the same direction, but will be good for those who need more than 16GB of RAM, or that need huge computational power.


----------



## WCraig

Gerk said:


> With an infinite budget and once the products are actually available, maybe. You could say exactly the same thing about your beloved iMacs and Mac Minis then as well ... they may not have thunderbolt2 but they do have thunderbolt ... and lo and behold, it will cost you a freakin' bundle just to add 4 drive bays (that are included in the current Mac Pro lineup) ...


Mini (Core i7) $800
External 4-bay TBolt with 4X1TB drives $1,100
Promise Technology PR401US 4.0TB Pegasus R4 RAID... in stock at OWC
Total $1,900

Current Mac Pro (Quad core Xeon) with 4X1TB 
$3,000

So, a Mini plus drive bay is 1/3 less expensive. Oh, wait a minute, that's not fair. The Mini has a 1TB internal so it is providing 5TB total! You can call the current Pro anything you like but it has always been cruelly expensive. 

Who knows what Apple is going to charge for the new Pro? Who know what peripherals are going to cost by the time it is available in the fall. Will total system cost be so high that the new Pro line is DOA? Could happen. Apple has lots of history of epic failures going all the back to the Lisa and Apple III. 

Craig


----------



## Gerk

monokitty said:


> You make it sound like the new Mac Pro can only use Thunderbolt add-ons. You can use USB 3.0 and FireWire add-ons with the revised Mac Pro, too.


You are reading that out of context. WCraig was intimating that because the current Mac Pro didn't have thunderbolt that you were "stuck" with the internal 4 bays for storage.


----------



## ldphoto

WCraig said:


> Apple has lots of history of epic failures going all the back to the Lisa and Apple III.


If they price it in the stratosphere, it will be the second coming of the TAM


----------



## Paddy

ldphoto said:


> Like everything, there are multiple shared of grey here, it's not just black or white. There are different levels of "Pro" users out there, among others.
> 
> 1) You have the cutting-edge video and audio producers that require all sorts of inputs and outputs and specialized interfaces. for those people, the new machine is going to be a disappointment.
> 
> 2) You have the photographers, graphic designers, animators and other creative pros that really just need a super stable machine with lots of RAM, a decent GPU that can run 2-3 displays, and expandable storage. Many of these people are already using external storage solutions, either because four bays are not enough, or because going external makes it easier to move content from one system to another. In most cases, the glossy, standard-gamut display on an iMac makes them a non-starter. In some cases, these people have moved to using high-spec MBPs rather than Mac Pros, because the external interfaces on the current Pro are too slow. I'm squarely in this category, and for people like me, the new Mac Pro could make sense depending on pricing (and a single-GPU option would probably be enough).
> 
> 3) You have the academic, scientific, medical and engineering folks that are looking for the most computing power they can get, with the *nix compatibility. If the pricing on the new pros comes in near what HP or Dell charges for a top-spec workstation (which isn't cheap!), the reduced footprint of the Mac Pro will make them a very good choice, with good OpenCL support for GPU computing tasks.
> 
> 4) You have the high-end pro-sumer folks, whose budget is rather flexible, and who want the latest and greatest because it's new, and it looks cool, and it's top of the line. they will never use more than 25% of the capabilities of the machine, but hey, it's still a sale for Apple. These are the same people that would also buy a 4K display to use with iMovie  Apple is great at attracting this type of buyer. These people would never have bought the old beast of a Mac Pro.
> 
> In my experience, the users that fall within the categories 2), 3) and 4) outnumber those in 1). I'd say apple is playing to the majority (in an already small niche), realizing that they can't please everyone all of the time.


I probably belong in category 2. While the external storage issue is a pain, I'm sitting here complaining with 4 external hard drives sitting on my desk. There are another 4 IN the Mac Pro - the ones on my desk are backups - one is now too small to hold a complete clone of my startup disk, and one is full of music. And there are another couple of 2.5" disks floating around too. So...really and truly, the mess around my desk wouldn't be any worse if I swap the out of date stuff for newer TB drives/RAID etc. Probably the biggest "problem" with a new MP would be where to put the Robber's modem and the Airport Extreme - both of which currently sit on a "shelf" (a piece of wood - just sits there) spanning the top of the cheese grater. Certainly can't put anything on top of the new MP! I think it's a problem I might be able to find a solution for. 

Of course, there are a couple of FW devices I'd have to buy adapters for (they're not bus-powered, so this shouldn't be a problem - just more stuff to spend $$ on).

And then there is the monitor issue - but mine is now 6.5 years old, so perhaps it's time for a refresh anyway? Or time to add a second NEW one?  (adapters...more adapters...)

Yes...it's one of those "if you give a mouse a cookie" situations. (those of you who've had children in the past 28 years will know what I'm talking about...)

As for the price? Maybe a little more than the current line - but I really cannot see them charging _way more_ or nobody would be able to afford one. The MP market isn't huge as it is, so they'll have to be fairly careful on how they price them, especially with the realization that at the very least, most, if not all purchasers are going to have to also buy external storage solutions of some sort. 

So...are they going to come with matching black keyboards and Magic Mice or are those going to be things we'll have to supply too? (Will black versions make their way into the Apple store?)


----------



## WCraig

Macfury said:


> From my perspective, this is like saying your car will no longer come with passenger seats, so that it can be made more compact--then crowing that it leaves the choice of how many passenger trailers to attach to the car up to you.


So, your analogy is that the Mac Pro is like a passenger car?!

Wouldn't it be more appropriate to equate it with a heavy hauler, like a highway tractor? And what trailer comes standard with a new highway tractor? That's right: none! You choose the trailer based on your needs. You don't get a standard 48 foot box trailer when you really need a gravel hopper.

Maybe you should explain to White Western Star the error of their (lack of) bundling.

Craig


----------



## Gerk

WCraig said:


> Mini (Core i7) $800
> External 4-bay TBolt with 4X1TB drives $1,100
> Promise Technology PR401US 4.0TB Pegasus R4 RAID... in stock at OWC
> Total $1,900
> 
> Current Mac Pro (Quad core Xeon) with 4X1TB
> $3,000
> 
> So, a Mini plus drive bay is 1/3 less expensive. Oh, wait a minute, that's not fair. The Mini has a 1TB internal so it is providing 5TB total! You can call the current Pro anything you like but it has always been cruelly expensive.
> 
> Who knows what Apple is going to charge for the new Pro? Who know what peripherals are going to cost by the time it is available in the fall. Will total system cost be so high that the new Pro line is DOA? Could happen. Apple has lots of history of epic failures going all the back to the Lisa and Apple III.
> 
> Craig


If you want to compare the full features of a Mac Pro don't forget to add these to your Mini though:

So $1900 as outline above, 
+ $1100 for a 3 slot PCIe expansion chassis
+ $500 for another 1 slot PCIe expansion chassis
+ $150 in thunderbolt cables (3 cables)
$3650 (and the Mini still has half of the RAM slots that the Mac Pro does)

I agree with you on terms that we don't know what things are going to cost. We do know what things cost now for inferior add-on options (thunderbolt 1) and it just doesn't look good on that front. I really really hope that Apple hits it out of the park with this one, but I'm very dubious. ldphoto made good points in the 4 types of users Apple is catering to, but unfortunately I fall into the 1st category he listed, meaning that this new offering doesn't cut it for my needs without more add-ons ... and add-ons cost money, especially if there's an Apple logo on them!


----------



## i-rui

monokitty said:


> You make it sound like the new Mac Pro can only use Thunderbolt add-ons. You can use USB 3.0 and FireWire add-ons with the revised Mac Pro, too.


But only thunderbolt can be a reasonable equivalent to internal drive bays (in terms of speed). In the old Mac Pro model you can add SATA cards and expand externally that way if need be.

As I said earlier, i have never felt any need for a smaller mac pro. In fact, if anything i've expanded the internal drives by sticking a HDD in the 2nd optical bay. The idea of expanding by external units defeats any and all purposes of making the unit smaller.

I appreciate the thought process into much of the design. I just wish they would have applied it while keeping the extra bays and pcie slots.

If the future holds reasonably priced external expansion then i'll switch over, but if i have to spend $1500 extra for more drive bays, then I'll hold off for as long as possible or build a hackintosh.



screature said:


> One thing I just noticed about the design of the new MP is that the way the case is designed and that the cover pulls off the top all cables will have to be unplugged in order to get inside (say to up grade the RAM).
> 
> To me this is a design flaw you don't have to do that with the existing MP.


good point. I often just unplug the power cable and open up the side to do a quick upgrade on a card or drive.


----------



## Gerk

WCraig said:


> So, your analogy is that the Mac Pro is like a passenger car?!
> 
> Wouldn't it be more appropriate to equate it with a heavy hauler, like a highway tractor? And what trailer comes standard with a new highway tractor? That's right: none! You choose the trailer based on your needs. You don't get a standard 48 foot box trailer when you really need a gravel hopper.
> 
> Maybe you should explain to White Western Star the error of their (lack of) bundling.
> 
> Craig


But the current "trucks" DO come with a trailer (even if it's not tailored for everyone's needs it gets the job done). The new trucks will have no trailer with them at all, and no one even knows how much they will cost at this point (but given Apple's history I don't anticipate them being cheap enough that you will still be able to provide a suitable trailer without spending more $$).


----------



## Macfury

WCraig said:


> So, your analogy is that the Mac Pro is like a passenger car?!
> 
> Wouldn't it be more appropriate to equate it with a heavy hauler, like a highway tractor? And what trailer comes standard with a new highway tractor? That's right: none! You choose the trailer based on your needs. You don't get a standard 48 foot box trailer when you really need a gravel hopper.
> 
> Maybe you should explain to White Western Star the error of their (lack of) bundling.
> 
> Craig


Your analogy doesn't work. You may say that the Macpro has switched from being a passenger car to a highway tractor, but at the expense of the loss of its original functionality.


----------



## Gerk

i-rui said:


> But only thunderbolt can be a reasonable equivalent to internal drive bays (in terms of speed). In the old Mac Pro model you can add SATA cards and expand externally that way if need be.
> 
> As I said earlier, i have never felt any need for a smaller mac pro. In fact, if anything i've expanded the internal drives by stick a HDD in the 2nd optical bay. The idea of expanding by external units defeats any and all purposes of making the unit smaller.
> 
> I appreciate the thought process into much of the design. I just wish they would have applied it while keeping the extra bays and pcie slots.
> 
> If the future holds reasonably priced external expansion then i'll switch over, but if i have to spend $1500 extra for more drive bays, then I'll hold off for as long as possible or build a hackintosh.
> 
> 
> 
> good point. I often just unplug the power cable and open up the side to do a quick upgrade on a card or drive.


I'm in exactly the same boat as you i-rui and I have added eSata cards to both my Mac Pro setups as well. I too appreciate the design but I also wish they had not axed the PCIe and bays ... or at the very least not axes ALL of them. Even a single/double drive bay and a single PCIe slot would have made things less painful for me.

Lastly I'm in the same boat in terms of $$, if it's too much $$ to add back all the things I need it will be hackintosh land for me as well.


----------



## Gerk

screature said:


> One thing I just noticed about the design of the new MP is that the way the case is designed and that the cover pulls off the top all cables will have to be unplugged in order to get inside (say to up grade the RAM).
> 
> To me this is a design flaw you don't have to do that with the existing MP.


I don't think that's the case, look at this pic, the main cover seems to be off and it didn't disrupt the plug area.


----------



## HowEver

Simple solution for you: buy the NEW Mac Pro, or several, and store them all in an existing Mac Pro case, along with your peripherals. Done.



Macfury said:


> Because it was convenient, elegant and cut down on clutter. I still love it.


----------



## WCraig

Gerk said:


> You are reading that out of context. WCraig was intimating that because the current Mac Pro didn't have thunderbolt that you were "stuck" with the internal 4 bays for storage.


Of course, I wasn't saying that. 

Not so long ago, internal drives had a measurable performance advantage over externals. So there was this big computer tower that managed to cram in 4 bays. The big tower had to have lots of power and serious cooling in case you filled up every bay. Not everyone did. At the same time, for some people it wasn't enough. 

Along came TBolt (and USB3) and then there was NO measurable difference between internal and external. And Apple has this thing about small, stylish machines. So away went the bays along with their noisy cooling and watt-gobbling power supply. 

Apple gets to make the small, stylish--and yet crazy-powerful--computer that they love. Buyers get to put together a system with the amount and types of storage they want.

The only (potential) loser--our wallets. But that's always been the case.

Craig


----------



## i-rui

Gerk said:


> I don't think that's the case, look at this pic, the main cover seems to be off and it didn't disrupt the plug area.


If you look at the apple website they have an animation of the cover sliding up past the ports. in it's current form it would have to pass by all the cables plugged in (meaning everything will have to be unplugged).

I supposed they could rectify this by removing the bottom portion that aligns with the I/O ports. It would be easy enough to do and it's still not a final product....but i wouldn't count on it.


----------



## Macfury

HowEver said:


> Simple solution for you: buy the NEW Mac Pro, or several, and store them all in an existing Mac Pro case, along with your peripherals. Done.


That was my original gag at the beginning of the thread!


----------



## Gerk

i-rui said:


> If you look at the apple website they have an animation of the cover sliding up past the ports. in it's current form it would have to pass by all the cables plugged in (meaning everything will have to be unplugged).
> 
> I supposed they could rectify this by removing the bottom portion that aligns with the I/O ports. It would be easy enough to do and it's still not a final product....but i wouldn't count on it.


Yep you're right ... that's a big DOH. Hopefully they fix that one. Then again it's not like you can actually DO anything inside the case ... stick 4 of the biggest pieces of RAM you can afford into it and never open it again.


----------



## Paddy

Gerk said:


> Yep you're right ... that's a big DOH. Hopefully they fix that one. Then again it's not like you can actually DO anything inside the case ... stick 4 of the biggest pieces of RAM you can afford into it and never open it again.


Yep...think we've solved that worry.  One down...


----------



## pm-r

Gerk said:


> In theory ... but at the end of the day there's a couple of things to consider:
> 
> ... ... A Pegasus 4 bay thunderbolt RAID enclosure is $1100 on the apple store (with 4 1TB drives). You can get a FW/USB/eSata based enclosure with 4x1TB drives for less than half of that price wise. The FW and USB ones will be slower than the tbolt one of course, but eSata would be just as fast and very economical (if only Apple would embrace this standard instead of insisting on reinventing the wheel with their own stuff).
> 
> ... ...


I was reading a speed review last week, and I can't find the link right now  , of the drive speed comparison of external drive cases using either FW 800, USB 3.0 or TB connections with fast HDDs.

I was quite surprised that usb 3.0 was substantially faster than even TB's speed.

The TB connection only became faster when they used a fast SSD in place of the HDD.


----------



## broad

Gerk said:


> In theory ... but at the end of the day there's a couple of things to consider..
> 
> 2) Price is definitely a factor. Given that the current Mac Pro comes with *4 full 6G sata channels* you could consider that as part of the deal. ....


2012 mac pros are 3.0Gbps


----------



## screature

ldphoto said:


> Actually, a quad-core Mac Mini is a pretty decent choice for those using their machine for photography and graphic design. *The quad-core i7 model is faster than the quad-core Mac Pro, *and the upgrade to 16GB RAM costs about 120$. Add a 4TB Western Digital TB Duo drive for 500$, and you have a pretty nice little system that allows you to hook up any monitor you want.
> 
> The new Mac Pro is in the same direction, but will be good for those who need more than 16GB of RAM, or that need huge computational power.


With extremely limited GPU performance.


----------



## pm-r

HowEver said:


> Simple solution for you: buy the NEW Mac Pro, or several, and store them all in an existing Mac Pro case, along with your peripherals. Done.


Funny and odd, I was just about to post just such a suggestion and wondering who would be among the first to do so. 

Also, personally the proposed 'new Mac Pro' has some interesting features and speed seems to be front and centre, and I guess it's unique design shouldn't be a huge surprised considering some of the stuff that comes out from the Apple/Ives workshop.

But personally I think the error of their ways was to actually call it a "Mac Pro", and they should have come up with a new Mac model name.

Then maybe they could get back and upgrade the existing Mac Pro using some and many of the new internals and at least the same number of connection ports. Yeah right!!


----------



## ldphoto

screature said:


> With extremely limited GPU performance.


True, but even on a library of tens of thousands of RAW files, the HD4000 does as well on a high-red 27" monitor as a dedicated GPU like the on in my MBP. Not everybody needs a fast GPU. when working in Aperture, Lightroom or Photoshop, a fast disk and fast CPU is more important that a fast GPU.


----------



## pm-r

Macfury said:


> That was my original gag at the beginning of the thread!


Sorry, and I guess HowEver and I both missed it, or we forgot.


----------



## monokitty

ldphoto said:


> True, but even on a library of tens of thousands of RAW files, the HD4000 does as well on a high-red 27" monitor as a dedicated GPU like the on in my MBP. Not everybody needs a fast GPU. when working in Aperture, Lightroom or Photoshop, a fast disk and fast CPU is more important that a fast GPU.


The next Mac mini should be getting the HD5000 (at the bare minimum to match the Air) or the performance version of Intel's integrated graphics, the HD5200. Granted, the HD-series of integrated graphics don't hold a candle to dedicated graphic cards, but they're becoming a lot better for many tasks.


----------



## pm-r

BTW: assuming one was to purchase one of the new 'Mac Pros' and it can use 128GB RAM in it's four, which appear to be end blade RAM sockets, where can one even buy single 32GB RAM (32 x 1) modules.

They seem to be in very short supply and I could only find one for some server for $750.00, and one via Dell for over $1,300.00, and they were edge socket RAM modules.

Hmmm, a bit of a pretty pricey upgrade.


----------



## monokitty

pm-r said:


> BTW: assuming one was to purchase one of the new 'Mac Pros' and it can use 128GB RAM in it's four, which appear to be end blade RAM sockets, where can one even buy single 32GB RAM (32 x 1) modules.


Almost no one needs 128GB of RAM as of today. If anyone.


----------



## pm-r

monokitty said:


> Almost no one needs 128GB of RAM as of today. If anyone.



Thanks, and a bit gross amount of RAM and I know I wouldn't need a fraction of that amount even if I had such a supporting Mac that could, but I have read of some Mac users who do.

Then, with that much RAM, how about a persistent lasting RAM Disk that some of us were able to use and boot from back in what, System 8 days?


----------



## Gerk

monokitty said:


> Almost no one needs 128GB of RAM as of today. If anyone.


I can think of several ways to use that much RAM that are totally viable that people would probably do if they had that much ram available


----------



## Gerk

broad said:


> 2012 mac pros are 3.0Gbps


Yep I stand corrected.


----------



## Macfury

Gerk said:


> I can think of several ways to use that much RAM that are totally viable that people would probably do if they had that much ram available


You could create alternate worlds with that much RAM!


----------



## screature

ldphoto said:


> True, but even on a library of tens of thousands of RAW files, the HD4000 does as well on a high-red 27" monitor as a dedicated GPU like the on in my MBP. *Not everybody needs a fast GPU. when working in Aperture, Lightroom or Photoshop, a fast disk and fast CPU is more important that a fast GPU.*


Just don't try and play the odd game to try and relax because it will be a frustrating experience.


----------



## screature

Gerk said:


> I don't think that's the case, look at this pic, the main cover seems to be off and it didn't disrupt the plug area.


Actually yes watch the presentation on the Apple site, starting at Expansion.

Or just look at this image...










How can you slide the cover off without unplugging all the cables first? It's impossible as the I/O panel is completely surrounded by aluminum.


----------



## pm-r

Gerk said:


> I can think of several ways to use that much RAM that are totally viable that people would probably do if they had that much ram available



OK, but my question remains, where can one even purchase normal single 32GB x 1 RAM modules?

And who will have/supply such modules with the apparently used blade connection RAM chips the the "new Mac Pro" will be using?

God forbid if it will be through Apple only.


----------



## Gerk

Macfury said:


> You could create alternate worlds with that much RAM!


Well RAM drives are pretty hard to beat for things like Photoshop scratch disk (if you are a pre CS5 user anyway).


----------



## FeXL

Gerk said:


> I can think of several ways to use that much RAM that are totally viable that people would probably do if they had that much ram available


We've got 24GB on board ours (4 core 3.2 5,1). Even with fairly large files in Photoshop (1GB+), our Page Outs & Swap Used are small. It's the proper amount.

Can always use more processing power, though. That's really the only reason we'd look at the new MP's.


----------



## Gerk

FeXL said:


> We've got 24GB on board ours (4 core 3.2 5,1). Even with fairly large files in Photoshop (1GB+), our Page Outs & Swap Used are small. It's the proper amount.
> 
> Can always use more processing power, though. That's really the only reason we'd look at the new MP's.


Yep but if you're running pre CS5 it's more pressing as there were max ram limitations before then where RAM based scratch can make a huge difference.


----------



## pm-r

screature said:


> Just don't try and play the odd game to try and relax because it will be a frustrating experience.


But then again, many high end games try and do cheat the OS and the users Mac model.

Many are not "normal" behaving Mac applications.


----------



## pm-r

I guess no single 32GB x 1 RAM modules easily exist for normal users yet, and I just called our local canadaram store, and they haven't seen or come across any.


----------



## Macfury

> "The new Mac Pro feels like another sign that Apple is abandoning its hardcore creative users in favor of mainstream users. Even though the new Mac Pro looks very different and stylish, the smaller size means that additional hard drives and other hardware will have to sit outside the enclosure. This feels like a poor tradeoff considering that most of these computers sit under, rather than on, desks in video editing and advertising firms around the world."


Apple Inc's new operating system iOs 7 "massive overhaul" of look and feel


----------



## ldphoto

screature said:


> Just don't try and play the odd game to try and relax because it will be a frustrating experience.


I have a Windows machine for that. i7-3930K overclocked to 4.2 GHz with dual AMD Radeon HD 7970 graphics cards. Not too much different from what the future Mac Pro will be, except I built it in March of 2012


----------



## Macfury

ldphoto said:


> I have a Windows machine for that. i7-3930K overclocked to 4.2 GHz with dual AMD Radeon HD 7970 graphics cards. Not too much different from what the future Mac Pro will be, except I built it in March of 2012


The Hackintosh market is going to explode.


----------



## Macfury

Apple announces new Mac Pro with a 'radical' new shape, Thunderbolt 2 - Phil Schiller: "Can't innovate any more my ass!" : apple


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Apple announces new Mac Pro with a 'radical' new shape, Thunderbolt 2 - Phil Schiller: "Can't innovate any more my ass!" : apple


As I recall, a lot of people dismissed the iPad when it first came out as well, likening it to a feminine hygiene product. Seems to have sold pretty well despite the naysayers.


----------



## kloan

I don't mind it... I think it is a shame it isn't Aluminum though. Plastic? Kinda sorta really cheap. The design itself though is clever in terms of cooling, as I imagine it'd be very efficient with a shape like that.


----------



## pm-r

kloan said:


> I don't mind it... I think it is a shame it isn't Aluminum though. Plastic? Kinda sorta really cheap. The design itself though is clever in terms of cooling, as I imagine it'd be very efficient with a shape like that.



Gheze.... Check it out why not??????, the proposed prototype Mac Pro *IS* made with aluminum, and finned as well, and also used as a passive heat dissipator.


----------



## kloan

pm-r said:


> Gheze.... Check it out why not??????, the proposed prototype Mac Pro *IS* made with aluminum, and finned as well, and also used as a passive heat dissipator.


Where do you see that? I'm looking at the one on Apple's website, it looks like plastic.

EDIT: ah, there it is... I didn't watch all of the slides. 2nd last slide mentions the aluminum enclosure. Well that's better.


----------



## milhaus

fjnmusic said:


> As I recall, a lot of people dismissed the iPad when it first came out as well, likening it to a feminine hygiene product. Seems to have sold pretty well despite the naysayers.


But, but, but ... this will be different because someone with the time to write 25000 posts on this forum instead of working in design, market analysis, or computer hardware says so.


----------



## groovetube

fjnmusic said:


> As I recall, a lot of people dismissed the iPad when it first came out as well, likening it to a feminine hygiene product. Seems to have sold pretty well despite the naysayers.


good point. Though this may a bit of a different case, (literally  ) because we're talking about an established product that is bought at a premium for several reasons, but it'll be interesting to see this develop.


----------



## Oakbridge

milhaus said:


> But, but, but ... this will be different because someone with the time to write 25000 posts on this forum instead of working in design, market analysis, or computer hardware says so.


That made me laugh. Well said.


----------



## eMacMan

Interestingly, amongst all those who claim "Apple knows best" when talking about the 'new and improved' MacPro, not a single one of them has said: "I will be an early buyer."


----------



## Paddy

eMacMan said:


> Interestingly, amongst all those who claim "Apple knows best" when talking about the 'new and improved' MacPro, not a single one of them has said: "I will be an early buyer."


I think, given that we've been given no information on price and there are still a number of rather key questions (ie: RAM type and availability, the internal storage type/size and is it user-upgradeable, etc.) to be answered, most of us who are interested in this new Mac cannot definitely say anything about whether or not we'd buy one right now.

My Mac Pro is now 5 years old - and it still works fine and runs the latest OS. It's no speed demon though - my 2012 MBP is noticeably faster at a lot of things. I'd *thought* I might upgrade to a new Mac Pro in the next little while IF the new model offered me some really impressive reasons to do so, at a price I'm willing to pay. The jury is still out, as far as I'm concerned. I'm not in any rush, but I'm definitely interested, given the age of my MP.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> As I recall, a lot of people dismissed the iPad when it first came out as well, likening it to a feminine hygiene product. Seems to have sold pretty well despite the naysayers.


I thought the iPad was a product that would sell, but that I would never buy. So far I'm right.


----------



## Macfury

milhaus said:


> But, but, but ... this will be different because someone with the time to write 25000 posts on this forum instead of working in design, market analysis, or computer hardware says so.


No. What's being said is that it is a disappointment to many of the people here, not that Apple won't have success selling it. I know that this flies in the face of corporate man love, but there you have it.


Enjoy your Pippin, by the way!


----------



## Macfury

Paddy said:


> My Mac Pro is now 5 years old - and it still works fine and runs the latest OS. It's no speed demon though - my 2012 MBP is noticeably faster at a lot of things. I'd *thought* I might upgrade to a new Mac Pro in the next little while IF the new model offered me some really impressive reasons to do so, at a price I'm willing to pay.


If someone offered to turn it into a powerhouse Hackintosh at a reasonable price, would you do it?


----------



## jeepguy

I think this new Mac Pro will appeal to those that don't want a tower, but want something more than a mac mini. Depending on base model price, if they price it right, it may open the doors to more Pro-sumers, than Pro's. I have to admit that I was a little disappointed with the announcement, it seems to cater more to the average Joe. The dual workstation GPU's is defiantly a step in the right direction. Right now I'm running a 2010 hex-core /32gb/Quadro 4000 at work so I would be very interested In how it stacks up against the new Mac Pro, especially under full load.


----------



## Paddy

Macfury said:


> If someone offered to turn it into a powerhouse Hackintosh at a reasonable price, would you do it?


Turn my current Mac Pro into a Hackintosh? I somehow doubt it - I've never been all that interested in going down the Hackintosh road because I'm not that into spending hours getting things to just work, and where every OS update represents a potential for massive problems. If I wanted that level of fiddling, I'd have tried out Linux, and I've still not gotten around to that.


----------



## iMatt

jeepguy said:


> I think this new Mac Pro will appeal to those that don't want a tower, but want something more than a mac mini. Depending on base model price, if they price it right, it may open the doors to more Pro-sumers, than Pro's. I have to admit that I was a little disappointed with the announcement, *it seems to cater more to the average Joe*. The dual workstation GPU's is defiantly a step in the right direction. Right now I'm running a 2010 hex-core /32gb/Quadro 4000 at work so I would be very interested In how it stacks up against the new Mac Pro, especially under full load.


I don't know if you're defining average Joes and prosumers as one and the same, but I make a distinction: Joe is just having fun, the prosumer is engaged in a money-making sideline and possibly working toward going pro. I think you're right that it will appeal to a lot of prosumers, but not so much with the Joes.

This thing has an absurdly over-the-top amount of computing power for most amateur needs, so most average Joes buying one will, IMHO, be squarely in the more-money-than-sense bracket.

Personally, I wouldn't seriously consider one unless I needed that horsepower to make some money. Like, say, if I wanted to "upgrade" the role of photography in my life from casual hobby to part-time occupation with the goal of selling images. Even then I would probably still wind up with a mini, but I would at least consider this new Mac Pro, especially if the pricing isn't outrageous.


----------



## i-rui

I'm wondering if the new mac pro will spell the end of life going forward for older Mac Pros into OS 11.

I can't see apple writing drivers for the video cards they no longer offer on their machines. I hope they at least support them into 10.9.

reading more about thunderbolt it seems it will never match the speeds of native SATA or PCIe. TB2 will help, but from what i've read it'll still be slower. The difference is marginal on HDDs, but on video cards it just won't come close.

Also the new Mac Pro's dual video GPUs won't be CUDA because they're not NVIDIA, so that lack of an option could be a deal breaker for some Pros.

The more a read about it I just wish apple updated the old Mac Pro to have new CPUs, TB, SATA3 and new vid cards. They could've still released this new unit under a different name. They may be trying to force this machine on the pro market, and i'm not sure it will stick with many.


----------



## a7mc

i-rui said:


> The more a read about it I just wish apple updated the old Mac Pro to have new CPUs, TB, SATA3 and new vid cards. They could've still released this new unit under a different name. *They may be trying to force this machine on the pro market, and i'm not sure it will stick with many.*


Apple forcing Pro users to use something they don't want? Unheard of!!
**cough**FinalCutProX**cough**

A7


----------



## jeepguy

iMatt said:


> I don't know if you're defining average Joes and prosumers as one and the same, but I make a distinction: Joe is just having fun, the prosumer is engaged in a money-making sideline and possibly working toward going pro. I think you're right that it will appeal to a lot of prosumers, but not so much with the Joes.
> 
> This thing has an absurdly over-the-top amount of computing power for most amateur needs, so most average Joes buying one will, IMHO,* be squarely in the more-money-than-sense bracket*.
> 
> Personally, I wouldn't seriously consider one unless I needed that horsepower to make some money. Like, say, if I wanted to "upgrade" the role of photography in my life from casual hobby to part-time occupation with the goal of selling images. Even then I would probably still wind up with a mini, but I would at least consider this new Mac Pro, especially if the pricing isn't outrageous.



your right Joe average would`t be buying this, for them it`s more about price than quality.

*prosumers *are excellent, better informed consumers who are buying top-grade or best-value products, or think they are. This group also includes a broader target for marketers and advertisers. According to Prosumer-Reports.com this attractive hip, young group "are influencing markets all over the globe. Empowered by new technologies and improved access to information, Prosumers are highly knowledgeable and demanding consumers.


----------



## i-rui

a7mc said:


> Apple forcing Pro users to use something they don't want? Unheard of!!
> **cough**FinalCutProX**cough**
> 
> A7


lol

i don't think it will be that bad of a flop. there could be a decent market for these depending on the price.

but i do think that there are segments of the "pro" market that will leave. I guess Apple is betting that segment will be replaced several times over by the "prosumer" market.

It's a shame they couldn't cater to both.


----------



## screature

i-rui said:


> I'm wondering if the new mac pro will spell the end of life going forward for older Mac Pros into OS 11.
> 
> I can't see apple writing drivers for the video cards they no longer offer on their machines. I hope they at least support them into 10.9.
> 
> reading more about thunderbolt it seems it will never match the speeds of native SATA or PCIe. TB2 will help, but from what i've read it'll still be slower. The difference is marginal on HDDs, but on video cards it just won't come close.
> 
> Also the new Mac Pro's dual video GPUs won't be CUDA because they're not NVIDIA, so that lack of an option could be a deal breaker for some Pros.
> 
> *The more a read about it I just wish apple updated the old Mac Pro to have new CPUs, TB, SATA3 and new vid cards. They could've still released this new unit under a different name. They may be trying to force this machine on the pro market, and i'm not sure it will stick with many*.


Yep I agree.


----------



## iMatt

jeepguy said:


> *prosumers* are excellent, better informed consumers who are buying top-grade or best-value products, or think they are. This group also includes a broader target for marketers and advertisers. According to Prosumer-Reports.com this attractive hip, young group "are influencing markets all over the globe. Empowered by new technologies and improved access to information, Prosumers are highly knowledgeable and demanding consumers.


Attractive, young, hip? Hmmm, I'm skeptical. I usually associate "prosumer" with middle aged consumers, most often male, with the resources to take their hobbies very seriously, equipping themselves with pro-quality or near pro-quality gear. 

In any case, without quibbling too much over terms we can probably all agree this is not going to be a high-end toy for many people who want to tweak their vacation snaps in iPhoto.


----------



## screature

iMatt said:


> Attractive, young, hip? Hmmm, I'm skeptical. *I usually associate "prosumer" with middle aged consumers, most often male, with the resources to take their hobbies very seriously, equipping themselves with pro-quality or near pro-quality gear.
> *
> In any case, without quibbling too much over terms we can probably all agree this is not going to be a high-end toy for many people who want to tweak their vacation snaps in iPhoto.


Not me. 

I was a prosumer after I got out of university and had a enough cash to buy some gear and start video tapping events and editing on gear that was not quite professional but not quite consumer either. 

I generally think of prosumers as being young and aspiring not middle aged hobbyists.


----------



## Macfury

screature said:


> Not me.
> 
> I was a prosumer after I got out of university and had a enough cash to buy some gear and start video tapping events and editing on gear that was not quite professional but not quite consumer either.
> 
> I generally think of prosumers as being young and aspiring not middle aged hobbyists.


I think this term initially applied to people buying expensive audio and video equipment with capabilities that exceeded the use to which it was put--not really computers.


----------



## HowEver

On the other hand.. what if the Mac Pro became affordable to the average person who wants some pretty amazing speed and the support of really sharp monitors?


----------



## iMatt

HowEver said:


> On the other hand.. what if the Mac Pro became affordable to the average person who wants some pretty amazing speed and the support of really sharp monitors?


How would you define "affordable" in that context?

The current Mac Pro starts at $2549, plus another grand for a 27" Cinema display.

If the new machine + monitor starts around $3500, I don't think many average people will consider it affordable.


----------



## i-rui

i think these new mac pros will have to start at a lower cost than the previous mac pros started at. if they're the same price or higher i see them being a bust.


----------



## ldphoto

eMacMan said:


> Interestingly, amongst all those who claim "Apple knows best" when talking about the 'new and improved' MacPro, not a single one of them has said: "I will be an early buyer."


That really depends on price. If a reasonable base model (maybe single GPU) is <2000$, I'll order one at launch. 2000$-2500$, it's less obvious. More than 2500$, I'd wait for refurbs 

Unless the FirePro GPUs are so kick-ass that the Mac Pro can also replace my gaming PC (i.e. supports CrossfireX and 3-display Eyefinity under windows), then that would be another ball game (The Mac Pro could be the ultimate LAN Party powerhouse). To this day, there hasn't been a GPU in a Mac Pro that has be good enough for that.

I'm also curious about the power utilization of the new Pro. The old Pro was a significant power hog (although not nearly as bad as my PC).


----------



## HowEver

$2500, say, like a 15" Retina.

And it's really not required to spend $1000 on an Apple display.

I said "the average person who wants some pretty amazing speed and the support of really sharp monitors," not "the average person." 



iMatt said:


> How would you define "affordable" in that context?
> 
> The current Mac Pro starts at $2549, plus another grand for a 27" Cinema display.
> 
> If the new machine + monitor starts around $3500, I don't think many average people will consider it affordable.


----------



## fjnmusic

i-rui said:


> I'm wondering if the new mac pro will spell the end of life going forward for older Mac Pros into OS 11.
> 
> I can't see apple writing drivers for the video cards they no longer offer on their machines. I hope they at least support them into 10.9.
> 
> reading more about thunderbolt it seems it will never match the speeds of native SATA or PCIe. TB2 will help, but from what i've read it'll still be slower. The difference is marginal on HDDs, but on video cards it just won't come close.
> 
> Also the new Mac Pro's dual video GPUs won't be CUDA because they're not NVIDIA, so that lack of an option could be a deal breaker for some Pros.
> 
> The more a read about it I just wish apple updated the old Mac Pro to have new CPUs, TB, SATA3 and new vid cards. They could've still released this new unit under a different name. They may be trying to force this machine on the pro market, and i'm not sure it will stick with many.


Apple makes its money by selling new hardware, not updating old software. They also make money by creating a desire for something unlike anything else on the market. This unit was not forecast by anyone I've read, and that element of surprise is vital to maintaining a competitive edge. The new Mac Pro is the first truly innovative design since Steve passed. It sort of resembles the new Apple campus. This new model does the job of creating a sensation, at a time when PC sales are dropping like flies, too. But it's a gamble, and a pricy model too. As Dr G says, we shall see.


----------



## fjnmusic

HowEver said:


> On the other hand.. what if the Mac Pro became affordable to the average person who wants some pretty amazing speed and the support of really sharp monitors?


I think the whole connotation of the word Pro is supposed to be "price does not matter" and "spared no expense." If you want to move the industry, start at the top, not the bottom.


----------



## HowEver

Not what I asked at all, but okay.



fjnmusic said:


> I think the whole connotation of the word Pro is supposed to be "price does not matter" and "spared no expense." If you want to move the industry, start at the top, not the bottom.


----------



## Oakbridge

a7mc said:


> Apple forcing Pro users to use something they don't want? Unheard of!!
> **cough**FinalCutProX**cough**
> 
> A7


Funny but the majority of the actual 'pros' haven't said that this is a machine that they don't want. It seems to be those who aren't the target market for this machine (i.e. would never spend $3000+ on a system) who are the biggest complainers. 

What I have seen from many of the pros is a cautious wait and see until the price/availability/final specs are released. Then many of them will pass judgement. 

As someone posted in one of the other threads, maybe this will get the other manufacturers off their behinds with regards to supporting TB which would be good for more than just the MacPro users. I'm sure that there are many mobile production people who would love to see more TB compatible devices that can be used on their topped up MacBook Pro Retina machines. And I think that most of us can agree that there is much more audio/video production being done out of a studio these days which requires a mobile machine. 

Time will tell...


----------



## iMatt

HowEver said:


> $2500, say, like a 15" Retina.
> 
> And it's really not required to spend $1000 on an Apple display.
> 
> I said "the average person who wants some pretty amazing speed and the support of really sharp monitors," not "the average person."


Right, which is why I asked what affordable means "in this context".

If you can put together a system for around $2500, whether the display is from Apple or a third party, I agree that would get some attention from that segment.


----------



## jeepguy

HowEver said:


> $2500, say, like a 15" Retina.
> 
> And it's really not required to spend $1000 on an Apple display.
> 
> I said "the average person who wants some pretty amazing speed and the support of really sharp monitors," not "the average person."


I think $2500 for a 4 core base model is a little steep, Dell and HP Workstations start at around $1500 with a single Nvidia or Ati workstation card. If they made it say $1899 for a base 4 core 8gig ram, and $2500 for the 6 core, I think lots of people will jump on board, after all they save hundreds on the case and PSU alone. I know we as Mac evangelist discount Dell and HP, but I can tell you that they dominate in the engineering field, where I work we have a mix mostly HP workstations, and most laptops are Macbook Pro`s. One other very important thing I thought about, the small foot print makes it very portable, last year I had to take a Mac Pro from Toronto to Calgary on Westjet, it would have been so much simpler with the current size to just carry on, instead of checking it in.


----------



## Gerk

i-rui said:


> i think these new mac pros will have to start at a lower cost than the previous mac pros started at. if they're the same price or higher i see them being a bust.


Indeed. I have to agree here. I also think it's going to be very crucial in terms of what modules they will build (if any) and the pricing on them as well. For me it still looks all bad in terms of PCIe at the very least -- let's hope that Apple will build PCIe expansion chassis that are more affordable (and work better!) than the current crop of them. $1100+ for a Magma chassis kind of blows the budget before it even starts.


----------



## Gerk

ldphoto said:


> That really depends on price. If a reasonable base model (maybe single GPU) is <2000$, I'll order one at launch. 2000$-2500$, it's less obvious. More than 2500$, I'd wait for refurbs
> 
> Unless the FirePro GPUs are so kick-ass that the Mac Pro can also replace my gaming PC (i.e. supports CrossfireX and 3-display Eyefinity under windows), then that would be another ball game (The Mac Pro could be the ultimate LAN Party powerhouse). To this day, there hasn't been a GPU in a Mac Pro that has be good enough for that.


You never know, it might be a game powerhouse ... it has happened once or twice before when they hit that cutting edge just right ... but it only lasts for a month or so and then it's blase again. Also with the lack of an updatable GPU setup anyone who was a serious gamer that is buying this unit for serious gaming ... well they would need to rethink their plan.


----------



## fjnmusic

HowEver said:


> Not what I asked at all, but okay.


I think it is. If the Mac Pro became "affordable" (and there is a wide range here), it would no longer be a Pro. That's what I'm saying. Apple wants Pros to be perceived as the ones with the deep pockets that the rest of us wish we could be. It's not supposed to be affordable for everyone.


----------



## Gerk

Apple has shifted their design intent in terms of their markets .. it now goes something like this:

total newbies + standard consumers > prosumers > other emerging markets > pros

There has been a very obvious shift away from the high-end pro market both in terms of hardware and software design. This new Mac Pro does not change this assessment. Pros are "a lot of work" to make happy, prosumers seem to be much happier if you throw them a cool looking bone with some power and lots of "bling" in the specs department -- which fits Apple's design intent pretty much perfectly these days.


----------



## fjnmusic

Gerk said:


> Apple has shifted their design intent in terms of their markets .. it now goes something like this:
> 
> total newbies + standard consumers > prosumers > other emerging markets > pros
> 
> There has been a very obvious shift away from the high-end pro market both in terms of hardware and software design. This new Mac Pro does not change this assessment. Pros are "a lot of work" to make happy, prosumers seem to be much happier if you throw them a cool looking bone with some power and lots of "bling" in the specs department -- which fits Apple's design intent pretty much perfectly these days.


I dunno. I think the design of this new cylindrical computer is pretty cool. Boxes are boring. If you want a box with some colorful ornamentation, get Alienware. This switch from box to cylinder is pretty bold, design-wise. Like most things Apple, we'll all hate it at first, and then get a little obsessed by it, and then want to try one, and then the rich ones among us will get one and the rest will be jealous…and in six months' time, there will be a cheaper version with fewer specs but a more reasonable price tag, and they will sell in droves because even if they are priced higher than the competition, they'll still be a fraction of the price of the top of the line Mac Pro.


----------



## Gerk

fjnmusic said:


> I dunno. I think the design of this new cylindrical computer is pretty cool. Boxes are boring. If you want a box with some colorful ornamentation, get Alienware. This switch from box to cylinder is pretty bold, design-wise. Like most things Apple, we'll all hate it at first, and then get a little obsessed by it, and then want to try one, and then the rich ones among us will get one and the rest will be jealous…and in six months' time, there will be a cheaper version with fewer specs but a more reasonable price tag, and they will sell in droves because even if they are priced higher than the competition, they'll still be a fraction of the price of the top of the line Mac Pro.


I was more referring to the hardware and software design not the physical aesthetics. I'm fine with the Darth Vader does R2D2 trash can look personally  I care a lot more about what is inside my boxes than how they look (to a certain extent) ... but a nice looking box never hurts either.


----------



## a7mc

Oakbridge said:


> Funny but the majority of the actual 'pros' haven't said that this is a machine that they don't want. It seems to be those who aren't the target market for this machine (i.e. would never spend $3000+ on a system) who are the biggest complainers. .


I'm an actual pro. I'm saying this is a machine I don't want
(unless it's priced under $1600 well equipped... but let's face it, it's built in the US, and labelled pro... I'm guessing over $2800).

A7


----------



## Kosh

I'd have to say that Gerk is at least partly right. This new cool cylindrycal computer has some nice bling. Just being cylindrical and black is part of the bling/coolness factor. Then you got those cool LED lights on the input ports with the motion sensor. Not sure how that motion sensor works, though. But the thing's got CPU and GPU power. I'd consider it, but I really think mobility more than CPU power is now what I need as a prosumer. 

I'm sure it would turn heads for those who buy Alienware machines.


----------



## pm-r

Well that didn't take very long... 

Hilarious mockups of Apple's new Mac Pro - Crave - Computers - CNET Asia


----------



## bse5150

pm-r said:


> Well that didn't take very long...
> 
> Hilarious mockups of Apple's new Mac Pro - Crave - Computers - CNET Asia


lol


----------



## Macfury

Welcome to 2008:

CLVE TVBE Futuristic PC | iTech News Net


----------



## screature

Oakbridge said:


> Funny but the majority of the actual 'pros' haven't said that this is a machine that they don't want. It seems to be those who aren't the target market for this machine (i.e. would never spend $3000+ on a system) who are the biggest complainers.
> *
> What I have seen from many of the pros is a cautious wait and see until the price/availability/final specs are released. Then many of them will pass judgement. *
> 
> As someone posted in one of the other threads, maybe this will get the other manufacturers off their behinds with regards to supporting TB which would be good for more than just the MacPro users. I'm sure that there are many mobile production people who would love to see more TB compatible devices that can be used on their topped up MacBook Pro Retina machines. And I think that most of us can agree that there is much more audio/video production being done out of a studio these days which requires a mobile machine.
> 
> Time will tell...


That is the approach I am taking... too bad after over 2 years of neglect we have to continue to wait...

Now try and tell me that the "Pro" market has not been neglected by Apple.


----------



## groovetube

fjnmusic said:


> I dunno. I think the design of this new cylindrical computer is pretty cool. Boxes are boring. If you want a box with some colorful ornamentation, get Alienware. This switch from box to cylinder is pretty bold, design-wise. Like most things Apple, we'll all hate it at first, and then get a little obsessed by it, and then want to try one, and then the rich ones among us will get one and the rest will be jealous…and in six months' time, there will be a cheaper version with fewer specs but a more reasonable price tag, and they will sell in droves because even if they are priced higher than the competition, they'll still be a fraction of the price of the top of the line Mac Pro.


the thing is, most of the real pros I know, couldn't really care less what case it's in. They like the coolness of the mac pro now, sure. But all the pros are going to care about, is power, expandability, and price. If they can get all 3 on the OS X platform, great. If not, they'll go peecee in a heartbeat unless they're tied to OS X for software reasons.


----------



## screature

fjnmusic said:


> I think it is. I*f the Mac Pro became "affordable" (and there is a wide range here), it would no longer be a Pro.* That's what I'm saying. Apple wants Pros to be perceived as the ones with the deep pockets that the rest of us wish we could be. It's not supposed to be affordable for everyone.


I don't disagree but then, if the price was right, this Mac would fill the "prosumer" gap that many have been calling for many years.

But now that it is the ONLY option for Pros shows just shows out of touch Apple has become with the Pro market... But then again I don't think they really care.

Too bad....


----------



## pm-r

Macfury said:


> Welcome to 2008:
> 
> CLVE TVBE Futuristic PC | iTech News Net


Amazing!! Did Ives possibly have one of those when he was growing up?


----------



## Gerk

As GT pointed out, and I have to agree ... Pros don't typically buy their machines because they _look_ cool, they buy their machines on the basis of what they need to get their jobs done.

I too, am a "real" pro and I don't want this machine (well ok I might lust over it's looks a bit on the cool factor but it's doubtful it will get the job done for me without having to take a second mortgage on my home to do it).


----------



## i-rui

pm-r said:


> Amazing!! Did Ives possibly have one of those when he was growing up?


I'm pretty sure Ives was fully grown in 2008!


----------



## Gerk

Macfury said:


> Welcome to 2008:
> 
> CLVE TVBE Futuristic PC | iTech News Net


Even that one had an internal drive bay and internal optical drive bay.


----------



## Gerk

screature said:


> I don't disagree but then, if the price was right, this Mac would fill the "prosumer" gap that many have been calling for many years.
> 
> But now that it is the ONLY option for Pros shows just shows out of touch Apple has become with the Pro market... But then again I don't think they really care.
> 
> Too bad....


There's never been a "prosumer gap," ever. There has always been machines targeted at them since the early 90's. There looks like there will soon be, however, a "pro" gap -- well not so much as a gap but a "fall of the cliff at the end of the product line".


----------



## screature

Gerk said:


> There's never been a "prosumer gap," ever. There has always been machines targeted at them since the early 90's. There looks like there will soon be, however, a "pro" gap -- well not so much as a gap but a "fall of the cliff at the end of the product line".


Sure there was, that is why people were calling for a smaller form factor MacPro... 

Call it whatever you like there were people who wanted a headless Mac (i.e., not an iMac) more powerful and expandable than a Mac Mini but not as expensive and cumbersome as a Mac Pro.

Geesh Gerk this is common knowledge.


----------



## ldphoto

screature said:


> Sure there was, that is why people were calling for a smaller form factor MacPro...
> 
> Call it whatever you like there were people who wanted a headless Mac (i.e., not an iMac) more powerful and expandable than a Mac Mini but not as expensive and cumbersome as a Mac Pro.
> 
> Geesh Gerk this is common knowledge.


And this will fit the bill, although perhaps not for the "less expensive" bit.


----------



## Gerk

screature said:


> Sure there was, that is why people were calling for a smaller form factor MacPro...
> 
> Call it whatever you like there were people who wanted a headless Mac (i.e., not an iMac) more powerful and expandable than a Mac Mini but not as expensive and cumbersome as a Mac Pro.
> 
> Geesh Gerk this is common knowledge.


Just because people wanted a smaller tower doesn't mean that there was a hole in the offerings for prosumers ... if you take that approach then with the new Mac "Pro" there is an even bigger whole in the line up ... this is not a tower -- it has no drive bays and no PCIe slots so it doesn't fit what they were looking for and it takes away what the current Mac Pro already provides. It's actually LESS expandable than a Mac Mini (I didn't think that would be possible, but here it is).

If you want to look at it like that then I guess you're right to, but to me the prosumer machine has been the high end iMac for many years now. It was never a "hole" in the market to me, it just just the typical "You'll use what we say you will use" approach -- which has really come to bear with the latest upcoming offering. Not only will there be a cry out for smaller form towers, there will be a cry out for ANY towers.


----------



## Gerk

ldphoto said:


> And this will fit the bill, although perhaps not for the "less expensive" bit.


And not for the "tower" part either -- you ain't puttin' nothing in these cases.


----------



## pm-r

Gerk said:


> And not for the "tower" part either -- you ain't puttin' nothing in these cases.


Agreed. 

And as my youngest wrote also when I emailed him on 'What do you think of the proposed new "Mac Pro"??'

His reply:
"I think the design aesthetic is great, and if they can pull off that much power in that little box, it's pretty impressive. More then anything it shows that Apple is no longer a personal computing company, but instead a personal device company. The iPhone alone is outselling the mac in volume, profit, and overall revenue. Add the iPad and iPod to this and the mac quickly moves into the shadows of Apple's past. This doesn't even include App/Book/Music/... sales through those devices which when combined completely dwarfs the mac division. As a business, where are you going to put your best engineers and resources?

As a pro, I want to be able to jam as much hardware into this box. The pro is going further down the device line, and moving away from the computing world. It's sad to see, but perhaps that is just where the world is moving."

Pretty well spot on I'd say!!


----------



## groovetube

screature said:


> Sure there was, that is why people were calling for a smaller form factor MacPro...
> 
> Call it whatever you like there were people who wanted a headless Mac (i.e., not an iMac) more powerful and expandable than a Mac Mini but not as expensive and cumbersome as a Mac Pro.
> 
> Geesh Gerk this is common knowledge.


but this isn't it. Sure, it's smaller, but it's still a mac pro, and all indications are, pricing will still be a premium.

So, the headless mac with some expandability in the 'prosumer' arena still hasn't appeared.

The new mac pro, seems to straddle both, squeezing out the top pro area, or so it appears.


----------



## WCraig

Gerk said:


> As GT pointed out, and I have to agree ... Pros don't typically buy their machines because they _look_ cool, they buy their machines on the basis of what they need to get their jobs done.
> 
> I too, am a "real" pro and I don't want this machine (well ok I might lust over it's looks a bit on the cool factor but it's doubtful it will get the job done for me without having to take a second mortgage on my home to do it).


Did pricing get announced, somewhere? Or do you have a crystal ball? 

One way to look at the new Pro is that all the money is in CPU, GPU and external connections. Compared to the old Pro, it will be substantially cheaper to make the package. (And less expensive to test/support as Apple doesn't have to test endless combinations of cards and drives.) There are going to be good/better/best configurations and we've been shown the best. Who knows what the good/better models are going to include?

Clearly Apple wants to make TBolt a viable technology and the new Pro is part of a push to jump-start the TBolt market. This creates some opportunities and all it will take is a couple of companies competing to bring prices down. That is still a big "if" but you seem to have written off the possibility completely. 

There are hints that prices don't have to be sky-high. Take a look at the TBolt to Firewire and TBolt to GigEthernet adapters--only $29 each. That's pretty reasonable and suggests that the built-in TBolt circuitry isn't that horribly priced.

We need to wait until prices are actually announced before getting our panties all twisted up!

Craig


----------



## groovetube

WCraig said:


> Did pricing get announced, somewhere? Or do you have a crystal ball?
> 
> One way to look at the new Pro is that all the money is in CPU, GPU and external connections. Compared to the old Pro, it will be substantially cheaper to make the package. (And less expensive to test/support as Apple doesn't have to test endless combinations of cards and drives.) There are going to be good/better/best configurations and we've been shown the best. Who knows what the good/better models are going to include?
> 
> Clearly Apple wants to make TBolt a viable technology and the new Pro is part of a push to jump-start the TBolt market. This creates some opportunities and all it will take is a couple of companies competing to bring prices down. That is still a big "if" but you seem to have written off the possibility completely.
> 
> There are hints that prices don't have to be sky-high. Take a look at the TBolt to Firewire and TBolt to GigEthernet adapters--only $29 each. That's pretty reasonable and suggests that the built-in TBolt circuitry isn't that horribly priced.
> 
> We need to wait until prices are actually announced before getting our panties all twisted up!
> 
> Craig


It may be cheaper to make, but it's going to be assembled in the US.

So I wouldn't hold my breath on it being substantially cheaper. 

Perhaps, somewhat cheaper.

Personally, I'm a fan of the push for thunderbolt connections. But, I am speaking not as one of the many pros who aren't super enthused about the cost of replacing or buying expensive chassis to house their cards etc.


----------



## screature

Gerk said:


> Just because people wanted a smaller tower doesn't mean that there was a hole in the offerings for prosumers ...* if you take that approach then with the new Mac "Pro" there is an even bigger whole in the line up ... this is not a tower* -- it has no drive bays and no PCIe slots so it doesn't fit what they were looking for and it takes away what the current Mac Pro already provides. * It's actually LESS expandable than a Mac Mini *(I didn't think that would be possible, but here it is).
> 
> If you want to look at it like that then I guess you're right to*, but to me the prosumer machine has been the high end iMac for many years now.* It was never a "hole" in the market to me, it just just the typical "You'll use what we say you will use" approach -- which has really come to bear with the latest upcoming offering. Not only will there be a cry out for smaller form towers, there will be a cry out for ANY towers.


And effectively that is what I am saying.

I disagree as the iMac has very limited expandability and it is not headless. It was and is simply a high-end consumer rig.

How is it "LESS expandable than a Mac Mini"? This makes no sense to me as it has more ports and much more RAM capacity... I really don't know where you are coming from with that...

Sorry it seems you are arguing just for the sake of it now and not really listening to what others are trying to say.


----------



## screature

groovetube said:


> *but this isn't it. Sure, it's smaller, but it's still a mac pro, and all indications are, pricing will still be a premium.*
> 
> So, the headless mac with some expandability in the 'prosumer' arena still hasn't appeared.
> 
> The new mac pro, seems to straddle both, squeezing out the top pro area, or so it appears.


Granted. Because of the Xeon CPUs and high end GPUs it will have a premium price. But if they had kept the same design but with i7's and just a very good GPU it would have been that prosumer machine.

As i-rui stated for the "true" Pro just adding TB, USB 3.0, upgrading the CPUs and GPU while keeping the same form factor and PCIe expandability would have kept it "Pro" without all the perceived compromises that the unimpressed are talking about here.

They could have introduced both but they didn't and as you put it we are left with a machine that "seems to straddle both, squeezing out the top pro area, or so it appears". 

Trying to please everyone with one option means that no one is truly satisfied... too expensive (most likely, time will tell) for the "prosumers" and not "Pro" enough for the real working Pro.


----------



## pm-r

groovetube said:


> It may be cheaper to make, but it's going to be assembled in the US.
> 
> So I wouldn't hold my breath on it being substantially cheaper.
> 
> Perhaps, somewhat cheaper.
> 
> Personally, I'm a fan of the push for thunderbolt connections. But, I am speaking not as one of the many pros who aren't super enthused about the cost of replacing or buying expensive chassis to house their cards etc.




If one does some checking and cost estimating on the processors and adapters and cards etc. proposed for that new mac, they sure ain't gonna be cheap!!

Add to the cost that most of those things are custom built to fit, and the price goes even higher.

Gheese not even the 'standard' SATA SSDs will fit or work, and where are those single 32GB RAM modules that some will want to add, and even they will need to be end-connected, blade modules, again not exactly "standard". 

Cheaper ≠ yes methinks!!


----------



## screature

WCraig said:


> Did pricing get announced, somewhere? Or do you have a crystal ball?
> 
> One way to look at the new Pro is that all the money is in CPU, GPU and external connections. *Compared to the old Pro, it will be substantially cheaper to make the package. * (And less expensive to test/support as Apple doesn't have to test endless combinations of cards and drives.) There are going to be good/better/best configurations and we've been shown the best. Who knows what the good/better models are going to include?
> 
> Clearly Apple wants to make TBolt a viable technology and the new Pro is part of a push to jump-start the TBolt market. This creates some opportunities and all it will take is a couple of companies competing to bring prices down. That is still a big "if" but you seem to have written off the possibility completely.
> 
> There are hints that prices don't have to be sky-high. Take a look at the TBolt to Firewire and TBolt to GigEthernet adapters--only $29 each. That's pretty reasonable and suggests that the built-in TBolt circuitry isn't that horribly priced.
> 
> We need to wait until prices are actually announced before getting our panties all twisted up!
> 
> Craig


Maybe in the future, but definitely not for early adopters, the price of TB peripherals are still sky high and very limited in number with the slowest and most limited roll out of peripherals of any new standard.


----------



## screature

groovetube said:


> *It may be cheaper to make, but it's going to be assembled in the US.
> 
> So I wouldn't hold my breath on it being substantially cheaper*.
> 
> Perhaps, somewhat cheaper.
> 
> Personally, I'm a fan of the push for thunderbolt connections. But, I am speaking not as one of the many pros who aren't super enthused about the cost of replacing or buying expensive chassis to house their cards etc.


I agree.

And then add the substantial cost of all those TB peripherals... the total cost of acquisition and switching to the new "paradigm" is going to be substantial indeed.


----------



## groovetube

screature said:


> Granted. Because of the Xeon CPUs and high end GPUs it will have a premium price. *But if they had kept the same design but with i7's and just a very good GPU it would have been that prosumer machine.*
> 
> As i-rui stated for the "true" Pro just adding TB, USB 3.0, upgrading the CPUs and GPU while keeping the same form factor and PCIe expandability would have kept it "Pro" without all the perceived compromises that the unimpressed are talking about here.
> 
> They could have introduced both but they didn't and as you put it we are left with a machine that "seems to straddle both, squeezing out the top pro area, or so it appears".
> 
> Trying to please everyone with one option means that no one is truly satisfied... too expensive (most likely, time will tell) for the "prosumers" and not "Pro" enough for the real working Pro.


(in bold) if they did come out with that machine, I'd line up to get one. I bet many people would.


----------



## screature

groovetube said:


> (in bold) if they did come out with that machine, I'd line up to get one. I bet many people would.


Count me in, I would have lined up for it too!


----------



## Paddy

Me three. I was afraid when they announced a while back that they had something special in store for us that it might not be quite what we all want/think we want. Sigh.

BTW - anyone notice that the power button is on the BACK where all the ports are? What's with that? I guess they really think we'll have these babies sitting on our desks so when we need to turn them on or off, we can just reach 'round behind and grope about or something. Can't turn 'em very easily with a mess of stuff attached - and we're all going to at least a couple of things attached (monitor, drives) and it could be quite a few things attached. Now that is definitely a weird form over function decision, if you ask me. 

Unless...they're bringing back a power button on the keyboard. Of course, this would only work for wired keyboards. And I read somewhere that this was a violation of the USB standard and that's why they discontinued it in the first place.

Or maybe they think we'll never be turning them off, ever.


----------



## pm-r

Paddy said:


> ... ...
> BTW - anyone notice that the power button is on the BACK where all the ports are? What's with that? I guess they really think we'll have these babies sitting on our desks so when we need to turn them on or off, we can just reach 'round behind and grope about or something. ... ...
> Unless...they're bringing back a power button on the keyboard. Of course, this would only work for wired keyboards. And I read somewhere that this was a violation of the USB standard and that's why they discontinued it in the first place.
> 
> Or maybe they think we'll never be turning them off, ever.


Have you not noticed that Apple/Ives have been attempting on hiding and camouflaging the Mac's Power Button since the life saver colored iMacs, if not even before?

And I've lost count of Mac client's/users calls on - " I just got a newer Mac, how do I turn it on? "

I guess it comes down to Apple/Ives just insisting on super clean lines, and with no stupid obvious Power Button showing. 

Gheese, my recently acquired mid 2011 27" iMac doesn't even have any glow light or anything to show that it's still booted and running with the display off set with Energy Saver!! Now, how dumb is that??

Right, just DUMB!!!

EDIT:

I think the worst case was some years ago when someone got a new Mac that came with only a small foldout for a "manual" that I believe the Guinness Book of Records labeled the smallest, shortest provided Manual ever provided, and just instructed the new user to just connect the keyboard and mouse, connect it to a proper power outlet and Turn it On. 

"All instructions will be on the Desktop for how to use your new Mac."

But just a few things were missing - absolutely no instructions to do any such actions, nor even how or where the *&^%$%* Power Button was.

Seems that things haven't changed much!!


----------



## monokitty

Paddy said:


> BTW - anyone notice that the power button is on the BACK where all the ports are? What's with that?


I don't think I've hit the power button on my Mac mini since I first unboxed it two years ago...


----------



## Macfury

I've hit the power button on my MacPro a dozen times this month alone.


----------



## broad

pm-r said:


> Have you not noticed that Apple/*Ives* have been attempting on hiding and camouflaging the Mac's Power Button since the life saver colored iMacs, if not even before?
> 
> And I've lost count of Mac client's/users calls on - " I just got a newer Mac, how do I turn it on? "
> 
> I guess it comes down to Apple/Ives just insisting on super clean lines, and with no stupid obvious Power Button showing.
> 
> Gheese, my recently acquired mid 2011 27" iMac doesn't even have any glow light or anything to show that it's still booted and running with the display off set with Energy Saver!! Now, how dumb is that??
> 
> Right, just DUMB!!!


Ive. Ive. Ive. Not ives, ive.


----------



## pm-r

broad said:


> Ive. Ive. Ive. Not ives, ive.


Gee, I guess I could/should have at least added a ' !!! ie Ive's. Or just typed Ive. 

Oh, just so vital!!


----------



## pm-r

monokitty said:


> I don't think I've hit the power button on my Mac mini since I first unboxed it two years ago...


Hmmm...??? What OS X version and how much RAM do you have installed?

And/or are you just saying that you've never had to even use it )the power button) and have just used the Restart option?

Or have you not even done that?

I find when using and looking at Activity Monitor, that no OS X will release all memory properly, even when normal apps aren't even open, and things tend to get just a tiny bit slightly sluggish, which a normal quick restart seems to fix.

But no Power Button use normally needed.


----------



## monokitty

I don't shut down my Mac. And when it does get shut down when the power goes out a few times a year, it auto restarts as per my preferences.


----------



## Joker Eh

monokitty said:


> I don't shut down my Mac. And when it does get shut down when the power goes out a few times a year, it auto restarts as per my preferences.


Ditto.


----------



## Gerk

WCraig said:


> Did pricing get announced, somewhere? Or do you have a crystal ball?
> 
> One way to look at the new Pro is that all the money is in CPU, GPU and external connections. Compared to the old Pro, it will be substantially cheaper to make the package. (And less expensive to test/support as Apple doesn't have to test endless combinations of cards and drives.) There are going to be good/better/best configurations and we've been shown the best. Who knows what the good/better models are going to include?
> 
> Clearly Apple wants to make TBolt a viable technology and the new Pro is part of a push to jump-start the TBolt market. This creates some opportunities and all it will take is a couple of companies competing to bring prices down. That is still a big "if" but you seem to have written off the possibility completely.
> 
> There are hints that prices don't have to be sky-high. Take a look at the TBolt to Firewire and TBolt to GigEthernet adapters--only $29 each. That's pretty reasonable and suggests that the built-in TBolt circuitry isn't that horribly priced.
> 
> We need to wait until prices are actually announced before getting our panties all twisted up!
> 
> Craig


I said *it's doubtful* ... you're jumping to conclusions here as well. I still predict (with a crystal ball if you like), that buying the CPU module, a storage module and a PCIe module will come up to more $$ than the current Mac Pro. Just a prediction, I have no inside information, etc, but look at Apple's history and tell me if you think they will put out that main CPU module plus two additional modules and still be under the price of the current Mac Pros ... if so then the CPU module will probably end up being around the price of a Mac Mini -- which again, is *doubtful*

As for making thunderbolt a viable technology I guess the last almost 2 years that it's been out and mostly under-utilized didn't count? Not they are making thunderbolt 2 ... so you think that will be any different? As for the opportunity for third parties why do you think the second revision of thunderbolt is going to change their adoption? It's still something that's pretty much Mac-only at the moment so sure, maybe someone like Lacie or another company that caters to Mac users might do something with it ... but I dunno. In the pro audio/video world, where it would really shine, it's barely been adopted by anyone for anything (and the few things that it has been used with are either crappy or out of most people's budgets).

As for the ethernet adapters, they are from Apple. No licensing fees involved there most likely. Third parties ... not so much. Even thunderbolt cables are expensive compared to say, an eSata or USB cable (both of which you can buy for $2 or less).

As far as getting panties twisted up .. I don't have to wait for anything to get mine in a knot, why should I? I have mine in a knot due to the fact that they have gone nuked from high orbit the last in a loooooong line of mac towers (which I've owned a considerable amount of). That's enough for me to get my panties in a knot, thanks. The rest is just enough to make me angry, but I'll hold off on that until I know just how much I'm gonna have to dish out (or not!) for the next Mac Pro to suit my needs.


----------



## Oakbridge

Joker Eh said:


> Ditto.


What he said.


----------



## Gerk

Oakbridge said:


> What he said.


Then you guys clearly are not the Mac Pro demographic :lmao:


----------



## Paddy

monokitty said:


> I don't shut down my Mac. And when it does get shut down when the power goes out a few times a year, it auto restarts as per my preferences.


Ah, you don't live in Leaside then, where momentary power outages seem to be an almost weekly (and annoying) occurrence! 

The auto restart during the day would be great, but startup chimes in the middle of the night...not so good. (I'd have to remember to mute the sound all the time - not going to happen) Given my hubby's reaction to the dryer buzzing (three floors away!) after he's gone to sleep, I don't think the auto restart is going to be too popular in our household.


----------



## CubaMark

Paddy said:


> Ah, you don't live in Leaside then, where momentary power outages seem to be an almost weekly (and annoying) occurrence! \


Nobody - and certainly not a "pro" - should be running their Mac without a battery backup / surge protection unit. Those of us on laptops can get away with it, but iMacs, Minis and Mac Pros? Uh-uh. Mission-critical means constant-power and the few precious minutes required to shut down cleanly.


----------



## Joker Eh

CubaMark said:


> Nobody - and certainly not a "pro" - should be running their Mac without a battery backup / surge protection unit. Those of us on laptops can get away with it, but iMacs, Minis and Mac Pros? Uh-uh. Mission-critical means constant-power and the few precious minutes required to shut down cleanly.


Always always always run battery backup/power surge. I thought that was just normal to do.


----------



## robert

Yup, during the summer there are often brown outs during the day.
I'd be screwed if I didn't have a UPS hooked up to my Mac Pro and internet.
When the first ones battery became low, I bought a new one on sale and use the old one 
for my TV and DVD player.
Well worth the investment.
Can't wait to see the pricing on the new Mac Pro.


----------



## jeepguy

Just watched the Mari demo on the apple developers site, very impressive.

the link is here but you need an a developer account (free) it's under *Painting the Future*
https://developer.apple.com/wwdc/videos/


----------



## Paddy

jeepguy said:


> Just watched the Mari demo on the apple developers site, very impressive.
> 
> the link is here but you need an a developer account (free) it's under *Painting the Future*
> https://developer.apple.com/wwdc/videos/


Actually, you don't need a developer account to view the videos - all you need to do is sign in with your Apple ID - I just did it.


----------



## pm-r

jeepguy said:


> Just watched the Mari demo on the apple developers site, very impressive.
> 
> the link is here but you need an a developer account (free) it's under *Painting the Future*
> https://developer.apple.com/wwdc/videos/



Hmmm... I couldn't even get it to play for some reason.

But checkout this somewhat related story:

Developer secretly tested new Mac Pro for weeks inside Apple's 'Evil Lab'


----------



## pm-r

pm-r said:


> Hmmm... I couldn't even get it to play for some reason.
> ... ...


It would help if I had read the directions properly - one needs to be running a mid version of Lion or later!!


----------



## Oakbridge

Gerk said:


> Then you guys clearly are not the Mac Pro demographic :lmao:





Paddy said:


> Ah, you don't live in Leaside then, where momentary power outages seem to be an almost weekly (and annoying) occurrence!
> 
> The auto restart during the day would be great, but startup chimes in the middle of the night...not so good. (I'd have to remember to mute the sound all the time - not going to happen) Given my hubby's reaction to the dryer buzzing (three floors away!) after he's gone to sleep, I don't think the auto restart is going to be too popular in our household.





CubaMark said:


> Nobody - and certainly not a "pro" - should be running their Mac without a battery backup / surge protection unit. Those of us on laptops can get away with it, but iMacs, Minis and Mac Pros? Uh-uh. Mission-critical means constant-power and the few precious minutes required to shut down cleanly.


Decent battery backup devices can be had for a couple of hundred dollars. What idiot would be in the Pro demographic and NOT have their investments protected?

Even if you forget the added protection a good UPS will give the hardware, if I was working on rendering a large video file and the power went out in the middle? I'd feel pretty stupid that not having a $200 UPS cost me an hour or more worth of work. Most have probably got more expensive units.

I had questioned how many of the naysayers in this forum are truly candidates for a machine like this. The answer is becoming very clear.


----------



## i-rui

you're making some connection between using a power button/not setting up auto-start to *NOT* having a UPS.

That's not necessarily the case. Certainly not in my situation. I have a UPS and yet still use the power button several times a month.


----------



## Garry

jeepguy said:


> Just watched the Mari demo on the apple developers site, very impressive.
> 
> the link is here but you need an a developer account (free) it's under *Painting the Future*
> https://developer.apple.com/wwdc/videos/


I was just going to post this! I watched it yesterday, very impressive to see the horsepower it has! Of course, it may not be enough for the "pros" that edit wedding videos or anything..


----------



## eMacMan

First off. Every user is different. Some of us go ahead and shut down when we know it will not be used for awhile. Some feel it is best to stay turned on and logged in as admin so the system will do its routine maintenance chores. Of course those same routine tasks are easily done via Terminal or by using Onyx. I can see no reason why either style user feels that their method is the only correct method but that sometimes seems to be the case.

Secondly some of us ended up with used Pros simply because a mini, or a Macbook hooked to an external monitor did not quite cut it for us. Yes we come no where close to using all the power of a MacPro but it does work for our needs.

I can see and absolutely recommend UPS for individuals working on things that take a long time to render, but much of my photo work is done in less than 30 seconds and is easy to re-do. Every thing is backed up multiple times and on those rare occasions when I put a bit of time into something, I am good at saving or saving as whichever is appropriate. Given that the MacPro occupies the space where the UPS would go I have no problem working without that particular safety net.


----------



## Paddy

eMacMan said:


> First off. Every user is different. Some of us go ahead and shut down when we know it will not be used for awhile. Some feel it is best to stay turned on and logged in as admin so the system will do its routine maintenance chores. Of course those same routine tasks are easily done via Terminal or by using Onyx. I can see no reason why either style user feels that their method is the only correct method but that sometimes seems to be the case.
> 
> Secondly some of us ended up with used Pros simply because a mini, or a Macbook hooked to an external monitor did not quite cut it for us. Yes we come no where close to using all the power of a MacPro but it does work for our needs.
> 
> I can see and absolutely recommend UPS for individuals working on things that take a long time to render, but much of my photo work is done in less than 30 seconds and is easy to re-do. Every thing is backed up multiple times and on those rare occasions when I put a bit of time into something, I am good at saving or saving as whichever is appropriate. Given that the MacPro occupies the space where the UPS would go I have no problem working without that particular safety net.


Describes my situation to a T. I HAD a UPS for a long time - but its battery went and I never replaced it. I do, of course, have decent surge protection. At the moment, I have nowhere to put a UPS, and if even if I'm working on something when the outage happens, I've never lost more than 5 minutes worth of work. Like eMacMan, I have multiple backups.


----------



## CubaMark

WADR, a UPS is not just about losing work... it's about protecting your gear. Sudden power loss to a spinning platter? That's a problem, one that may not show up on the next reboot, but over time.... That's going to be less of an issue with SSDs (or is it?), but no system likes to be KO'd.


----------



## Macfury

Oakbridge said:


> Decent battery backup devices can be had for a couple of hundred dollars. What idiot would be in the Pro demographic and NOT have their investments protected?


Do you really have to call people idiots for disagreeing with you? Talking about computers seems to make you one angry person. Perhaps you should step away from the thread for a few days.


----------



## groovetube

CubaMark said:


> WADR, a UPS is not just about losing work... it's about protecting your gear. Sudden power loss to a spinning platter? That's a problem, one that may not show up on the next reboot, but over time.... That's going to be less of an issue with SSDs (or is it?), but no system likes to be KO'd.


this is very true, and a good warning. I had a drive go from a power out, but that was a really long time ago and learned my lesson. I've heard quite a few stories of pooched drives from power outages.

I have a portable with an ssd now, but I have it in use in my music room for the plugged in firewire drives.


----------



## screature

macfury said:


> do you really have to call people idiots for disagreeing with you? Talking about computers seems to make you one angry person. Perhaps you should step away from the thread for a few days.


+1


----------



## CubaMark

Since I'm on a roll here  I feel the need to state something obvious. A number of friends and colleagues have had the forethought to purchase and use UPS devices... but in practically every case, when I come into contact with their setup, I discover that they haven't bothered to actually understand how the UPS works. None - *none* - have without prompting installed the USB connection that provides for auto-shutdown if the machine is unattended, and even worse - most had no idea that only half of the plugs actually provided back-up power, and that those are the plugs where the computer and any external hard drives should be connected. Usually I find the computer connected only to the surge protection plug, and something silly - like a desk lamp - plugged into the battery plugs. There really is a difference in how some peoples' brains work - it's like conservative and liberal, perhaps - those who are tech-minded and those who are oblivious to anything with electricity coursing through it....


----------



## Oakbridge

Macfury said:


> Do you really have to call people idiots for disagreeing with you? Talking about computers seems to make you one angry person. Perhaps you should step away from the thread for a few days.


Hmm I believe that I was making a comment/agreeing with CubaMark's post. 

But if you need to keep pace on your goal to 25,000 messages, you're welcome. I was glad I could help.


----------



## pm-r

Macfury said:


> Do you really have to call people idiots for disagreeing with you? Talking about computers seems to make you one angry person. Perhaps you should step away from the thread for a few days.



+1!!

I don't call myself a Mac "pro" user, even though I often get paid for some of my Mac work I do. Does that make me a Mac "pro" user?? Not as far as I'm concerned.

I have never used any home UPS, but do use multiple good top end surge suppressors and we are very lucky to have some of the best, and most stable BC Hydro power in the country.

And that has worked well, for what I do and need for the last 24+ years with my Mac(s).

I have always been surprised by many users, who sometimes may need such UPS protection, who have never even tested their UPS.

Many a time I have just pulled their plugged in power connector to test their "assumed" UPS "protection", only to find it wasn't any different to just pulling the power cord for those, like me, that weren't using any UPS. Such users MUST check the operation of their UPS if they really need one.

With that stated, if I lived somewhere with any 'iffy' power, I would definitely have a good, capacity capable, and tested UPS connected and in use. No question.


----------



## Paddy

Well, I suppose given the state of our power in Leaside (it IS really lame at times - these 1 second glitches are annoying) I should reconsider the UPS. I wasn't thinking about potential drive damage...

At least the APCs I've looked at now feature user-replaceable batteries.


----------



## monokitty

Paddy said:


> I wasn't thinking about potential drive damage...


Power outages almost never damage hard drives in my experience; from what I've seen as a technician, the worst I've seen is a blown power supply in an iMac from a power outage or spike. Regardless, as long as the data is backed up...


----------



## pm-r

CubaMark said:


> Since I'm on a roll here  I feel the need to state something obvious. A number of friends and colleagues have had the forethought to purchase and use UPS devices... but in practically every case, when I come into contact with their setup, I discover that they haven't bothered to actually understand how the UPS works. None - *none* - have without prompting installed the USB connection that provides for auto-shutdown if the machine is unattended, and even worse - most had no idea that only half of the plugs actually provided back-up power, and that those are the plugs where the computer and any external hard drives should be connected. Usually I find the computer connected only to the surge protection plug, and something silly - like a desk lamp - plugged into the battery plugs. There really is a difference in how some peoples' brains work - it's like conservative and liberal, perhaps - those who are tech-minded and those who are oblivious to anything with electricity coursing through it....



Yup!!! I couldn't agree more and just as I was saying and posted.


----------



## Gerk

CubaMark said:


> WADR, a UPS is not just about losing work... it's about protecting your gear. Sudden power loss to a spinning platter? That's a problem, one that may not show up on the next reboot, but over time.... That's going to be less of an issue with SSDs (or is it?), but no system likes to be KO'd.


It's also not so much the power drop that's hard on the gear, but the power up can be just as bad if not worse, especially if you're machine is setup to restart after a power failure. Sometimes on that initial power up there's a pretty big brownout that happens ... and it's incredibly hard on your gear to try and power up with only 90 or so volts happening 

P.S. Surge protectors don't generally do all that much. Yes they do add some protection, but not really as much as you might think. Ideally you really want your gear behind that filtered/buffered power on a proper UPS where possible.


----------



## Gerk

monokitty said:


> Power outages almost never damage hard drives in my experience; from what I've seen as a technician, the worst I've seen is a blown power supply in an iMac from a power outage or spike. Regardless, as long as the data is backed up...


So says the guy that can replace the iMac power supply himself  Those toasted power supplies usually happen when the power comes back up as opposed to when it goes down (see above post). I've dealt with that a number of times in a school I used to do some Mac IT work for. Took them about 4 power supplies before they heeded my warnings and finally bought cheap UPSes for all the machines in their labs.

Moral of the story ... if you don't have a UPS and the power goes down, unplug your gear before it comes back on if you can.


----------



## groovetube

so the drive failure was my imagination? How come I hear a lot about people's drives failing after a power failure?


----------



## Oakbridge

groovetube said:


> so the drive failure was my imagination? How come I hear a lot about people's drives failing after a power failure?


I've found that different people who have hardware/service expertise have different opinions on what can potentially happen after a sudden power loss. I try to follow the "better safe than sorry" philosophy, in effect listening to all of them. 

Having a decent working UPS is not going to harm my machines.


----------



## eMacMan

Auto restart is certainly a no-no if one is running surge protection only.

Also read the specs. A lot of "surge protectors" are little more than a power bar with a fancy label.


----------



## John Clay

Paddy said:


> At least the APCs I've looked at now feature user-replaceable batteries.


They always have.


----------



## chimo

Many of the surge suppression devices use just a few Metal Oxide Varistors (MOVs) to absorb the voltage spikes. The MOVs can absorb only so many before they fail. Sometimes they fail without any outward signs, so the protection they offer at that point is nil.


----------



## fjnmusic

Oakbridge said:


> I've found that different people who have hardware/service expertise have different opinions on what can potentially happen after a sudden power loss. I try to follow the "better safe than sorry" philosophy, in effect listening to all of them.
> 
> Having a decent working UPS is not going to harm my machines.


You know, your machine can still get fried even if it's off as long as it's still plugged in if, say, your house is hit by lightning. You need a surge protector that works faster than the speed of light (electricity). Best bet is a good backup and good insurance.


----------



## pm-r

_Quote:
Originally Posted by Paddy 
At least the APCs I've looked at now feature user-replaceable batteries.	
_



John Clay said:


> They always have.


Not so I'm afraid.

An older fellow had a old small black APC unit that was completely sealed, and absolutely no way to replace its battery.


----------



## pm-r

fjnmusic said:


> You know, your machine can still get fried even if it's off as long as it's still plugged in if, say, your house is hit by lightning. You need a surge protector that works faster than the speed of light (electricity). Best bet is a good backup and good insurance.



Yup!!! My cousin and her husband lost their stove, fridge, computer, TV, stereo and just about everything that was plugged in when a car hit a power pole close to their house the crossed up power lines fed the power through the wrong wires.

At least BC Hydro and their insurance paid for most of the damaged things.


----------



## John Clay

pm-r said:


> _Quote:
> Originally Posted by Paddy
> At least the APCs I've looked at now feature user-replaceable batteries.
> _
> 
> 
> 
> Not so I'm afraid.
> 
> An older fellow had a old small black APC unit that was completely sealed, and absolutely no way to replace its battery.


...really? I'd be curious to know the model number - all the APC units I've seen, going back to stuff manufactured in the early 90s, had replaceable batteries.


----------



## pm-r

John Clay said:


> ...really? I'd be curious to know the model number - all the APC units I've seen, going back to stuff manufactured in the early 90s, had replaceable batteries.



I don't know what model it was. The fellow that had it was 92 when I last saw him a few years ago.

It was a small maybe 10" x 6" x 4", mostly black, had APC decal and its UPS power quit working so we just used the surge protected receptacle. It was completely moulded closed, which I thought a bit strange at the time. Unless it was assembled the same way as his Mac mini, but I don't recall seeing any sort of slot or gap.

Anyway, he didn't really need any UPS for the work he did.

PS: It's strange how a forum's topic subject can change so much.


----------



## screature

pm-r said:


> I don't know what model it was. The fellow that had it was 92 when I last saw him a few years ago.
> 
> It was a small maybe 10" x 6" x 4", mostly black, had APC decal and its UPS power quit working so we just used the surge protected receptacle. It was completely moulded closed, which I thought a bit strange at the time. Unless it was assembled the same way as his Mac mini, but I don't recall seeing any sort of slot or gap.
> 
> Anyway, he didn't really need any UPS for the work he did.
> 
> PS:* It's strange how a forum's topic subject can change so much*.


Yep...










Maybe it is time to clear up the mess and get this thread back on track...


----------



## pm-r

Is that close to what happened to the development and planning design of the new Mac Pro from what some Mac pro users were wanting and hoping for?


----------



## Joker Eh

fjnmusic said:


> You know, your machine can still get fried even if it's off as long as it's still plugged in if, say, your house is hit by lightning. You need a surge protector that works faster than the speed of light (electricity). Best bet is a good backup and good insurance.


Ditto. Many people don't know that. Surge protectors are not 100%. It is just a good "better than nothing"


----------



## pm-r

Quote:
Originally Posted by fjnmusic 
You know, your machine can still get fried even if it's off as long as it's still plugged in if, say, your house is hit by lightning. You need a surge protector that works faster than the speed of light (electricity). Best bet is a good backup and good insurance.	




Joker Eh said:


> Ditto. Many people don't know that. Surge protectors are not 100%. It is just a good "better than nothing"



An electronics genius type friend told me the best surge protectors where the coil and choke types or whatever their innards are called, and I bought a Tripp-Lite unit some 20 years ago that cost about $90.00 some odd dollars as I recall.

It has worked well, and then some *good* APC power bars are plugged into it that and our Macs are plugged into them.

But I guess unplugging one's Mac(s) is still the safest, especially in frequent lightening prone areas. But I'd guess that a good UPS is designed to provide such lightening strikes protection and I know I'd sure use one as well if I lived in such a lightening prone area.


----------



## fjnmusic

Even if your MacBook is unplugged, a very strong magnetic force can still destroy it, as evidenced on S5E1 of Breaking Bad.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Even if your MacBook is unplugged, a very strong magnetic force can still destroy it, as evidenced on S5E1 of Breaking Bad.


That was some mighty magnet!


----------



## james_squared

MBAs look nice. I wish they had a quad-core though.


----------



## Joker Eh

The full screen still sucks though.


----------



## kloan

So the MBA clockspeeds are down, but the overall performance is up... how? What's so special about these new processors? They're still dual-core...

For $450 less (than the upgraded to 1.7ghz entry level 11"), the refurb's 2012 model looks like a hell of a lot better deal, with a 1.7ghz processor. So what if the graphics chip is '4000' instead of '5000'... as if anyone does any serious gaming on these things, and they've been capable of playing 1080p movies for quite some time now.

Is a slightly faster graphics and 'up to' 4 hours more battery life worth the extra $450?


----------



## Joker Eh

kloan said:


> So the MBA clockspeeds are down, but the overall performance is up... how? What's so special about these new processors? They're still dual-core...
> 
> For $450 less (than the upgraded to 1.7ghz entry level 11"), the refurb's 2012 model looks like a hell of a lot better deal, with a 1.7ghz processor. So what if the graphics chip is '4000' instead of '5000'... as if anyone does any serious gaming on these things, and they've been capable of playing 1080p movies for quite some time now.
> 
> *Is a slightly faster graphics and 'up to' 4 hours more battery life worth the extra $450?*


For some and maybe most who use an Air. Just imagine only have to charge it when you go to sleep. You could use it a full day without charging that is huge. And when Mavericks comes out the battery life will even extend further.


----------



## monokitty

kloan said:


> So the MBA clockspeeds are down, but the overall performance is up... how? What's so special about these new processors? They're still dual-core...
> 
> For $450 less (than the upgraded to 1.7ghz entry level 11"), the refurb's 2012 model looks like a hell of a lot better deal, with a 1.7ghz processor. So what if the graphics chip is '4000' instead of '5000'... as if anyone does any serious gaming on these things, and they've been capable of playing 1080p movies for quite some time now.
> 
> Is a slightly faster graphics and 'up to' 4 hours more battery life worth the extra $450?


The CPU clock speed isn't saying all that much these days; despite being clocked considerably lower than last year's model, the Mid 2013 MacBook Air is just barely slower than its predecessor (in some areas), yet much more energy efficient with considerably better built-in graphics. (True, it's no gaming machine, but people do game casually on it from time to time, and for those people, the better graphics come into play and add value).

- Considerably better battery life;
- Considerably better graphics (HD5000, ~40% better performance);
- Considerably faster SSD performance (256/512GB models);
- Now supports 'ac' WiFi.

Overall, I read somewhere (forget now) that the new MBA is actually, overall, faster than its predecessor by 8-10%. If you don't already own a MBA, going with a 2012 model I don't think makes the most amount of sense. More benchmarks: 2013 MacBook Air -- real world benchmarks.


----------



## John Clay

kloan said:


> Is a slightly faster graphics and 'up to' 4 hours more battery life worth the extra $450?


Yes. For the battery life alone.


----------



## james_squared

monokitty said:


> The CPU clock speed isn't saying all that much these days


Yup. For example, I have a 2.4GHz MacBook (Early 2008) and its GeekBench score is 3135 and a MBA at 1.8GHz (with an i5) has a score of 6105. Obviously it's more than just clock speed. Once the MBAs moved from the Core 2 Duo to the i5 or i7 (dual core) chipset they became far faster (again, according to GeekBench). Now, moving up to quad core would be an even larger jump.


----------



## kloan

Yeah, but they're still i5 dual core processors, nothing's changed there. It's not like they jumped up to a new chip technology and dropped the clock speed.

I have a 2011 model right now. If I sold mine and wanted to purchase another one later on, I wouldn't buy the latest. Maybe some people have the need for 'up to' 9 hours (I've never gotten the claimed battery life, ever), but I have no need for it. An 8-10% increase in performance is pretty negligible. I'm looking at a difference of $450.. that's almost 50% more of the cost of the refurb'd..

If on the other hand, they _didn't_ shortchange the entry level with a slower processor, and kept it at 1.7, I'd be more inclined to go with that.

FWIW, that 9 hours is likely only for the 1.3 model. What about if one upgrades to the 1.7? Do you still get up to 9 hours? Not likely. So is it really worth the difference in price?


----------



## MacDoc

Take Geekbench with a grain of salt and clock speed counts all the time - multi-processing only some of the time at least Apple removed the block no the i5 hyperthreading. 

I've gotten 14 hours reading off a Core2 as by nature they are lower power consumption and Apple used to tout 10 hours on the MacBook Unibodies and you could get that any more managing them carefully - one reason we continue to sell them by the dozen.

Then Apple dropped it to 7 hours which is iffy for a power user but jumps to 11 on the Retina carefully managed. I think dropping to 1.3 i5 then touting big battery gains was a bit of a con.

Speed for most users is almost entirely drive related - with processors idling along doing very little. The deals on the 1.8 i7 Air with 4 processing threads and 256 SSD were insane and they sold out right quick as people realized where the value was.
The 1.8 i7 will Turbo to 2.7 - generally we recommend the i7 in all cases as the price difference is marginal tho in the case of the 13" Retina the i5 price point is sweet.


----------



## monokitty

kloan said:


> Yeah, but they're still i5 dual core processors, nothing's changed there. It's not like they jumped up to a new chip technology and dropped the clock speed.


The i3/i5/i7 titles are just names - the chips are different. Sandy Bridge, to Ivy Bridge, to Haswell - they're all different and improved chips compared to their predecessors, even though they're under the same Core i5/i7 names. To say they're "still i5" processors means you're missing the point. The Mid 2013 Air with the 1.3 i5 is very comparable to last year's 1.7 i5 - your focus on the number is clouding your perception, I think.


----------



## kloan

monokitty said:


> The i3/i5/i7 titles are just names - the chips are different. Sandy Bridge, to Ivy Bridge, to Haswell - they're all different and improved chips compared to their predecessors, even though they're under the same Core i5/i7 names. To say they're "still i5" processors means you're missing the point. The Mid 2013 Air with the 1.3 i5 is very comparable to last year's 1.7 i5 - your focus on the number is clouding your perception, I think.


Not at all. The most notable difference is the integrated graphics, which as they claim is "up to 40% faster", unlikely that most of us would even see that improvement in daily use. Whatever they claim is the maximum improvement is rarely seen. It's just flashy numbers.

My perception is quite clear. They're touting better battery life with a slower processor, but claiming it's faster because of a slightly better integrated graphics chip. It's a slight of hand, which seems to be more and more common with Apple these days.

I'm comparing the 2012 i5 1.7ghz model with the 2013 i5 1.7ghz model, and I don't see $450 worth of improvements.

But then again, whoever does, is exactly who Apple is marketing towards.


----------



## John Clay

kloan said:


> Not at all. The most notable difference is the integrated graphics, which as they claim is "up to 40% faster", unlikely that most of us would even see that improvement in daily use. Whatever they claim is the maximum improvement is rarely seen. It's just flashy numbers.
> 
> My perception is quite clear. They're touting better battery life with a slower processor, but claiming it's faster because of a slightly better integrated graphics chip. It's a slight of hand, which seems to be more and more common with Apple these days.
> 
> I'm comparing the 2012 i5 1.7ghz model with the 2013 i5 1.7ghz model, and I don't see $450 worth of improvements.
> 
> But then again, whoever does, is exactly who Apple is marketing towards.


No, they're saying the slower clock speed is faster than the previous models, as well as using lower power.

More GHz doesn't always equal more power - don't you remember the Pentium 4? At 4 GHz, that thing was slower than a 1 legged dog.


----------



## kloan

John Clay said:


> No, they're saying the slower clock speed is faster than the previous models, as well as using lower power.
> 
> More GHz doesn't always equal more power - don't you remember the Pentium 4? At 4 GHz, that thing was slower than a 1 legged dog.


Ok, it's comparable in overall performance to the previous 1.7, and comes with an extra kick in battery life. So, the upgrade to the 1.7 chip may not be all that necessary. In which case, it'd only be a $200 price difference. I guess that's worth it... my math was off anyway, it's $350 extra, not $450, for the upgraded processor... doh.

I am still curious what kind of battery life the 1.7 will get.


----------



## WCraig

kloan said:


> ... They're touting better battery life with a slower processor, but claiming it's faster because of a slightly better integrated graphics chip. It's a slight of hand, which seems to be more and more common with Apple these days.
> 
> I'm comparing the 2012 i5 1.7ghz model with the 2013 i5 1.7ghz model, and I don't see $450 worth of improvements. ...


Poppycock! The 2013 i5 1.7 (Haswell) is equal to or slightly faster than the _2.0_ i5 from 2012 (Ivy Bridge):

2013 MacBook Air -- real world benchmarks

Of course, the rMBP is basically twice as fast in most tests. Still, the 2013 MBA looks like a great student machine and I think my daughter is really going to like the gift that she's going to get! 

Craig


----------



## kloan

WCraig said:


> Poppycock! The 2013 i5 1.7 (Haswell) is equal to or slightly faster than the _2.0_ i5 from 2012 (Ivy Bridge):
> 
> 2013 MacBook Air -- real world benchmarks
> 
> Of course, the rMBP is basically twice as fast in most tests. Still, the 2013 MBA looks like a great student machine and I think my daughter is really going to like the gift that she's going to get!
> 
> Craig


I don't see a dramatic difference between the two. Like I said, not something that would be noticeable in every day use.


----------



## chimo

I picked up one of the new AirPort Extremes today as an upgrade my much older version 2. I am noticing a huge difference in speed even on just 802.11n devices. It also seems to run a bit cooler than the old one.


----------



## monokitty

One of the better, more in-depth reviews of the Mid 2013 MacBook Air: AnandTech | The 2013 MacBook Air Review (13-inch). Worth a read.


----------



## james_squared

monokitty said:


> One of the better, more in-depth reviews of the Mid 2013 MacBook Air: AnandTech | The 2013 MacBook Air Review (13-inch). Worth a read.


Nice article. Thanks for the link.


----------

