Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Desktops > MacPro - Still No Thunderbolt (COME ON ALREADY)

MacPro - Still No Thunderbolt (COME ON ALREADY) (Page 3)
Thread Tools
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 03:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
Wow, that's pretty lame, esp. considering they start at US$2500. No wonder they didn't say anything about it.
I can see one of two options. One, Apple is keeping the Mac Pro on life support until sales of their towers become so low it makes no economic sense to keep making them. I'd imagine this would take, at most, two years.

Two, there is a more significant tower redesign on the way--the 2U form factor we've been hearing about--which will be announced sometime later in the year.

Unfortunately I'd say bet on #1.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 03:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
New processors in the dual-processor models: E5645. Looks like the same W3565 in the base model. Not sure if the six-core single processor system has the same W3680.
I saw that too, but it looks strange, because all of the comparison slides still compare to the previous gen MP (with the Geforce GT120).

Also I refuse to believe that they'd make an update to Westmere-class CPUs in 2012 without even dropping the price, but I have that sinking feeling...
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 04:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
I saw that too, but it looks strange, because all of the comparison slides still compare to the previous gen MP (with the Geforce GT120).

Also I refuse to believe that they'd make an update to Westmere-class CPUs in 2012 without even dropping the price, but I have that sinking feeling...
I don't think the single-processor models changed.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 04:13 PM
 
No USB 3. No Thunderbolt. No F'ing way.

this isn't an update, this is an insult.
I eat turtle soup for breakfast
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 04:14 PM
 
Slight speed bump for the Pro today then. A whopping 1.3x faster according to the ever optimistic Apple.

Still no decent CPU's or thunderbolt though. Not sure why they bothered.
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Palo Alto, CA USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 04:16 PM
 
looks like I was right, a "quiet update" which means no significantly new hardware, just a speed bump of the same hardware. No Ivy Bridge, no Thunderbolt, no USB3 (obviously, since you need Ivy Bridge to have USB3)

I guess the Mac Pro may become the iPod Classic of the Mac line.
( Last edited by anthology123; Jun 11, 2012 at 04:22 PM. )
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 04:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
Slight speed bump for the Pro today then. A whopping 1.3x faster according to the ever optimistic Apple.

Still no decent CPU's or thunderbolt though. Not sure why they bothered.
I wouldn't say no decent processors: it's not like the W3680 or the E5645s are shit.

As to why they bothered? Perhaps because the MPs account for, maybe, 5% of their overall sales?

My big fantasy? Event in the late summer/fall focused on desktops where we see new, 2U MPs. But then I'd also like to come home and find Heather Graham in my bathtub.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 04:30 PM
 
I think the made the update to entice anyone still waiting for an update to buy now.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 04:37 PM
 
Well I was hella wrong, thought they would make a serious upgrade.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 05:01 PM
 
So what's the game here...

This is either a last gasp before dying... or a pathetic stopgap until they can get a real update out there...

Either way, I think putting these out was an odd move. I don't think this update is going to motivate people to buy new hardware.

My sig is 1 pixel too big.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 05:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by ort888 View Post
So what's the game here...

This is either a last gasp before dying... or a pathetic stopgap until they can get a real update out there...
I think so.

And we know two things: 1) Apple isn't moved by the popular opinions of its users, and 2) Apple doesn't do what they see as legacy. So, the fate of the MP has already been decided. We just have to wait.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 05:30 PM
 
One interpretation is that there is a Thunderbolt chassis waiting to launch, but that it's delayed, and they gave the MP one last hurrah as a stopgap.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 05:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
One interpretation is that there is a Thunderbolt chassis waiting to launch, but that it's delayed, and they gave the MP one last hurrah as a stopgap.
This is the one I'm hoping for.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 05:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
New processors in the dual-processor models: E5645. Looks like the same W3565 in the base model. Not sure if the six-core single processor system has the same W3680.
Apple's June 2012 Mac Pro update, featuring a CPU released March 16, 2010!

Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
I wouldn't say no decent processors: it's not like the W3680 or the E5645s are shit.
They were great two years ago when they were released, but today they are shit. Here's a recap of the gap between the current E5-2600 Xeon and E5645 (E5645 is a bit slower than X5650):





( Last edited by mduell; Jun 11, 2012 at 05:48 PM. )
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 05:42 PM
 
The Mac Buyers Guide should read...

"DON'T BUY! Product Just Updated."

Mac Buyer's Guide: Know When to Buy Your Mac, iPod or iPhone

My sig is 1 pixel too big.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 05:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
They were great two years ago when they were released, but today they are shit. Here's a recap of the gap between the current E5-2600 Xeon and E5645 (E5645 is a bit slower than X5650)
No, they're not shit. This is a case of ZOMG! Teh Benchmarks! without looking at the real world. Will Photoshop/Avid/CFP/Logic still fly on your Mac Pro? Yes. Will it be as fast as the latest machines? No. That doesn't make them shit.

Now, you can rag on Apple all you want for their prices and lack of upgrades and be absolutely right. But calling the MP's CPUs shit requires taking a leave from the real world.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 06:04 PM
 
Maybe they just changed the CPUs because they ran out of some of the old ones.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
cgc
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Down by the river
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 06:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Maybe they just changed the CPUs because they ran out of some of the old ones.
Yeah, hard to find the old CPUs at the antique store. Thank God they can still scrounge up those old ass Radeon 5770 card...for a second I was expecting nVidia 7300GTs in there...
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 08:00 PM
 
Not good at all. They still say "Mac Pro supports 8GB registered DIMMs (R-DIMMs) for up to 32GB of memory in Quad-Core and 6-Core systems," an effing insult for $2500/$3000 towers. And "Mac Pro supports 8GB registered DIMMs (R-DIMMs) for up to 64GB of memory in 8-Core and 12-Core systems" for their $3800 tower.

32/64 GB maximum RAM in new "pro" towers in 2012 makes a joke out of Apple. And yes I know we can double that third party, but it is still lame.

The MPs remain excellent boxes, not shit, just disappointing and overpriced.

-Allen
( Last edited by SierraDragon; Jun 11, 2012 at 08:08 PM. )
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 09:20 PM
 
Honestly, you can quibble about the processor speed all day long. Fact remains, they didn't even give us USB 3 or Thunderbolt. My 8 year old has thunderbolt in his crummy iMac. Apple has offended it's loyalist consumers.
I eat turtle soup for breakfast
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 09:28 PM
 
Eden: why don't you just do your own Hackintosh thing and call it a day?
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 09:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
Now, you can rag on Apple all you want for their prices and lack of upgrades and be absolutely right. But calling the MP's CPUs shit requires taking a leave from the real world.
OK then, they're shit for the price you're paying for them. You can't even use Apple's own monitors with them. Dafuq?

---

Meanwhile, apparently Tim Cook sez:

Our pro customers are really important to us...don't worry as we're working on something really great for later next year.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 09:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
OK then, they're shit for the price you're paying for them. You can't even use Apple's own monitors with them.
That I'll agree with. When I bought mine it was price competitive with the same specs from HP, Dell, etc. Not the case any more.

David Pogue offers us a ray of hope.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 09:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
OK then, they're payoff for the price you're paying for them. You can't even use Apple's own monitors with them. Dafuq?

---

Meanwhile, apparently Tim Cook sez:

Our pro customers are really important to us...don't worry as we're working on something really great for later next year.

I don't believe this statement for a minute though. It doesn't take that much engineering effort to make a modern tower, especially not in comparison to any of Apple's other products. Apple's pro customers are not really important to Apple.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 10:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I don't believe this statement for a minute though. It doesn't take that much engineering effort to make a modern tower, especially not in comparison to any of Apple's other products. Apple's pro customers are not really important to Apple.
It Apple takes a lot of engineering to do anything. That's just the way they are.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 10:30 PM
 
I don't buy that email either. Tim Cook wouldn't be that specific. Especially about the timing.

My sig is 1 pixel too big.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 10:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by ort888 View Post
I don't buy that email either. Tim Cook wouldn't be that specific. Especially about the timing.
He wasn't quoting Cook. He's was quoting an Apple source he didn't name.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 10:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
No, they're not shit. This is a case of ZOMG! Teh Benchmarks! without looking at the real world. Will Photoshop/Avid/CFP/Logic still fly on your Mac Pro? Yes. Will it be as fast as the latest machines? No. That doesn't make them shit.
For me, they're shit.

The latest machines aren't fast enough for what I do, so not as fast as the latest machines really isn't fast enough.

Now I'm gonna have to buy a ****ing Dell. Nice job breaking it Apple.


Of course my new T-bolt monitor won't work with the Dell, but it won't work with a ****ing Mac Pro either.

Shit. Just shit.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 11:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
No, they're not shit. This is a case of ZOMG! Teh Benchmarks! without looking at the real world. Will Photoshop/Avid/CFP/Logic still fly on your Mac Pro? Yes. Will it be as fast as the latest machines? No. That doesn't make them shit.

Now, you can rag on Apple all you want for their prices and lack of upgrades and be absolutely right. But calling the MP's CPUs shit requires taking a leave from the real world.
Claiming they "fly" is a cop-out; it's more time waiting and less time doing. Every day for the life of the machine. Expectations for computers and assumptions for software advance every year. You're buying a premium priced 2010 CPU with the same performance as a mainstream 2012 CPU. And you're not buying for today, you're buying for the next 3-4 years. How's that 2010 hardware going to be in 2015-2016?

It's not just the 50% improvement in CPU performance over the last 2 years you're missing out on. It's memory for half the price with quadruple the capacity limit. It's the modern connectivity like TB and USB3.

But don't listen to me. Load your 2006 Mac Pro up with another PCIe card and oh, maybe you can get another 2GB RAM in there.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 11:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
But don't listen to me. Load your 2006 Mac Pro up with another PCIe card and oh, maybe you can get another 2GB RAM in there.
I never said they weren't overpriced: they are. However, claiming they're now shit is ridiculous. There are a lot of 2006 and 2008 MPs out there still working hard, and the current ones will last a while.

Additionally, I think if Apple were going to completely abandon the desktop market they would make an announcement of some kind. I just don't see them sneaking out the back door of a market they own.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 11:08 PM
 
does the thunderbolt display not work with mini displayport?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 11:11 PM
 
Not like it should.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2012, 11:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
does the thunderbolt display not work with mini displayport?
Nope.





This was a common problem when the Thunderbolt displays came out. People bought them and plugged them into their older mini-DisplayPort MacBook Pros. No worky.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 12:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
It Apple takes a lot of engineering to do anything. That's just the way they are.
But it's all relative. Apple's competitors are out-engineering them when it comes to tower hardware.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 12:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
For me, they're shit.

The latest machines aren't fast enough for what I do, so not as fast as the latest machines really isn't fast enough.

Now I'm gonna have to buy a ****ing Dell. Nice job breaking it Apple.


Of course my new T-bolt monitor won't work with the Dell, but it won't work with a ****ing Mac Pro either.

Shit. Just shit.

If the buying a Dell is nauseating to you, why not build your own rig?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 12:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
I never said they weren't overpriced: they are. However, claiming they're now drug is ridiculous. There are a lot of 2006 and 2008 MPs out there still working hard, and the current ones will last a while.
I'm not sure I buy this argument. Why should Apple be credited for a tower not dying? Most failures are probably hard disk related, which Apple cannot control. Apple also can't control memory failures, or video card failures. They can control power supply and cooling issues, but computers rarely fail in these areas. I'm over-simplifying to prove a point, but I hope you get what I'm driving at.

Additionally, I think if Apple were going to completely abandon the desktop market they would make an announcement of some kind. I just don't see them sneaking out the back door of a market they own.
Whatever the case is, their strategy is mysterious and bizarre.

Apple seems to have a history of various aspects of their product line being mysterious and bizarre in that it is almost like this aspect of their business has gone unnoticed, and I've never understood why they'd allow their brand to be tarnished this way.

Then again, there are still people out there buying and setting up Apple servers for some reason, so maybe they are depending on customer loyalty.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 12:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Whatever the case is, their strategy is mysterious and bizarre.
Yes, but that's the thing: Apple is a company which 1) doesn't announce future plans, 2) doesn't announce future products and 3) carefully controls leaks. This works spectacularly well when it allows them to disrupt industries: iPod, iPhone, iPad. But the flip side is now, when they obviously have some plans in place for their desktop/pro machines but feel no need to tell anyone. All we can do is wait.

Then again, there are still people out there buying and setting up Apple servers for some reason, so maybe they are depending on customer loyalty.
Because when you have, literally, millions of dollars of storage, workflows and files built around OS X, the fact your server doesn't have the latest, greatest Xeons doesn't matter. We're still buying new Mac Pros, because he have the work for them.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 12:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
Because when you have, literally, millions of dollars of storage, workflows and files built around OS X, the fact your server doesn't have the latest, greatest Xeons doesn't matter. We're still buying new Mac Pros, because he have the work for them.

The storage I can understand, because the life cycle of a storage appliance is much longer, they can be pricier to replace if you go with SAS or SSD disks, and storage is also platform agnostic (as long as you have a good iSCSI driver, if you go iSCSI).

Who in their right mind would setup a new Apple server is beyond me. The writing is clearly on the wall. At this point I'd say the writing is on the wall when it comes to Apple towers too, but unfortunately there aren't options for content creators committed to certain applications. I'm glad I don't work in this field, it is not a nice feeling to feel completely ass-raped with these prices, and this is what I'd consider those prices to be.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 12:45 AM
 
I would hazard to guess most Mac Pro users are not ones with access to million dollar storage solutions and workflows. A large chunk of Mac Pro users would actually benefit from things like Thunderbolt, USB 3, and eSATA.

For example, the Mac Pro used to be very popular with Photoshop jockeys, for small business type work. Note the comment "used to". Judging by online sentiment, it seems a fair chunk of them are moving away from the Mac Pro now, either to the iMac or else to Windows, both because of the cost of the Mac Pro and because of the fact it is lagging behind the competition.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 12:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
I would hazard to guess most Mac Pro users are not ones with access to million dollar storage solutions and workflows. A large chunk of Mac Pro users would actually benefit from things like Thunderbolt, USB 3, and eSATA.
I'll bet the vast majority of MPs are bought by large companies which employ people to do content creation. There are small businesses and individuals who use them, but, I think, most of the purchases are corporate. As long as I've been working in the business, which is close to 20 years, that's the way it's been.

A lot of the individual/freelancers I know have already moved onto MacBook Pros because of the portability advantage. The higher end MBPs are pretty powerful, and you can pick them up and take them with you.

. . .it seems a fair chunk of them are moving away from the Mac Pro now, either to the iMac or else to Windows, both because of the cost of the Mac Pro and because of the fact it is lagging behind the competition.
I've seen a move to MBPs, and some to iMacs. I've seen no moves to Windows. Now, I do know people who are discussing it should Apple kill the MPs, but no one I know of has actually taken the plumge.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 12:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Who in their right mind would setup a new Apple server is beyond me.
I think you and I have had this discussion already: because your entire network is set up with Apple servers and Apple machines. Everything works and everything's stable. There is no need to think about disrupting that until Apple makes it clear there's no way forward.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 01:05 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
If the buying a Dell is nauseating to you, why not build your own rig?
Dell's fine. I'm just picking on them for their dumb ads.

I run a Mac shop, so integrating a windows machine into my setup is going to be a pain in my ass, and will necessitate repurchasing a bunch of software.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 01:05 AM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
I'll bet the vast majority of MPs are bought by large companies which employ people to do content creation. There are small businesses and individuals who use them, but, I think, most of the purchases are corporate. As long as I've been working in the business, which is close to 20 years, that's the way it's been.

A lot of the individual/freelancers I know have already moved onto MacBook Pros because of the portability advantage. The higher end MBPs are pretty powerful, and you can pick them up and take them with you.
Agreed, a fair chunk are moving to the MPBs too, but I've seen a lot go to the iMac as well. And to Windows, esp. since Lightroom is available on that platform. Aperture be damned.

I've seen a move to MBPs, and some to iMacs. I've seen no moves to Windows. Now, I do know people who are discussing it should Apple kill the MPs, but no one I know of has actually taken the plumge.
I think you are looking at this from the corporate perspective, where I am looking at this from the small business end user perspective. I've known a lot of people who used to be on the Mac Pro, and pretty much all of them have ditched it completely, not necessarily because they wanted to, but because Apple has neglected the platform and overcharged for it for so long. But yes, you're right about the MBP in addition to the iMacs.

I would imagine this would be quite different in a mid-size or large company that has standardized on OS X, where a move to Windows workstations would make less sense... Yet, even then, subego who runs a Mac shop will be going through the pain of integrating a Windows machine.

The way Apple has treated Final Cut users hasn't inspired confidence either. The rollout of Final Cut X was one of the most arrogant I've seen in a long time, and it really was quite disgusting.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 01:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
Agreed, a fair chunk are moving to the MPBs too, but I've seen a lot go to the iMac as well. And to Windows, esp. since Lightroom is available on that platform. Aperture be damned.
I think another reason we're seeing people moving to the MBPs and iMacs is because those machines have gotten really powerful in and of themselves. Considering that most commercial software is still essentially single-threaded, either machine will benchmark within spitting distance of the low-end Mac Pros. There are actually very few jobs out there which really require 1) gobs of RAM or 2) more than four cores. Unless you do serious Photoshop, audio/video editing, scientific visualization or something similar, you just don't need that big box sitting there with most of its resources going to waste.

The way Apple has treated Final Cut users hasn't inspired confidence either. The rollout of Final Cut X was one of the most arrogant I've seen in a long time, and it really was quite disgusting.
True. They screwed the pooch on that one.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Oakland, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 01:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
I think you are looking at this from the corporate perspective, where I am looking at this from the small business end user perspective. I've known a lot of people who used to be on the Mac Pro, and pretty much all of them have ditched it completely, not necessarily because they wanted to, but because Apple has neglected the platform and overcharged for it for so long. But yes, you're right about the MBP in addition to the iMacs.
Yeah I moved from a G4 to a MBP and a Mini years ago, for all those reasons.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 01:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
I think another reason we're seeing people moving to the MBPs and iMacs is because those machines have gotten really powerful in and of themselves. Considering that most commercial software is still essentially single-threaded, either machine will benchmark within spitting distance of the low-end Mac Pros. There are actually very few jobs out there which really require 1) gobs of RAM or 2) more than four cores. Unless you do serious Photoshop, audio/video editing, scientific visualization or something similar, you just don't need that big box sitting there with most of its resources going to waste.
Even for end user video encoding, more than four cores is very nice. I encode 1080p just for my own fun as a consumer on an 8-thread 4-core i7, and even for me I think it's too slow. But I won't pay for a Mac Pro because it's just for fun. I don't make money off it.

But having lots of internal expandability is very nice. Thunderbolt still isn't cutting it because the cost is entry is high relative to the cost of the storage, and because just like other competing technologies (USB and Firewire), compatibility isn't perfect. OTOH, if you plug in internal drives into a Mac Pro, they just work, and do so for cheap.

Furthermore, if you have any desire for an internal audio card for example, the only solution is a Mac Pro... or a Windows machine.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 01:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
Even for end user video encoding, more than four cores is very nice. I encode 1080p just for my own fun as a consumer on an 8-thread 4-core i7, and even for me I think it's too slow. But I won't pay for a Mac Pro because it's just for fun. I don't make money off it.
That's why I said video: it really is one of the few applications which will work a lot of cores.

But having lots of internal expandability is very nice. Thunderbolt still isn't cutting it because the cost is entry is high relative to the cost of the storage, and because just like other competing technologies (USB and Firewire), compatibility isn't perfect. OTOH, if you plug in internal drives into a Mac Pro, they just work, and do so for cheap.
I'm actually in agreement with you, but I think we're in the minority. Most of the people I know who do audio have moved on to MBPs with various Firewire interfaces. The portability just seems to outweigh the performance penalty.

I really do think we're going to see the death of the desktop in the next decade.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 02:01 AM
 
One huge problem with the MBP for audio is if you start pushing it you have a screamer fan two feet from your head. With a tower you can stuff it in a soundproof enclosure.

But the portability is pretty sweet for location stuff.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 02:32 AM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
But then I'd also like to come home and find Heather Graham in my bathtub.
This gave me the willies. But I think that's because my first association with finding a celebrity in a bathtub isn't your first association with finding a celebrity in a bathtub. Alive.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 02:33 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
One huge problem with the MBP for audio is if you start pushing it you have a screamer fan two feet from your head. With a tower you can stuff it in a soundproof enclosure.

But the portability is pretty sweet for location stuff.
Indeed. That can be slightly annoying. I'm *very* curious to see how the new Pro Books' asymmetric fan changes that.
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:42 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2