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 4)
Thread Tools
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 03:45 AM
 
These Mac Pro are just the Power Macs G4 MDD from 2003. Something big has to be coming our way.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 06:15 AM
 
Maybe the next Mac Pro will come with an even bigger enclosure and have Heather Graham in it.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Nashua NH, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 07:23 AM
 
I'd buy that for a dollar.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 07:42 AM
 
I think it's fairly clear that the MP as we know it is dead, and they're only stringing it along a little longer to get some replacement ready. Easiest answer to that some TB chassie, but maybe they'll do something to make the iMac easier to upgrade as well. If that something is truly only coming out in 2013 as they're saying, it's a major failure in Apple's planning that they don't have a Sandy Bridge-EP model for now. No, something has gone wrong - if not, why keep to GPUs two generations behind?

I need a new signature...
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.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 08:19 AM
 
Siracusa points out on twitter that the CPUs that the MP used to use are no longer on Intel's price list, so they've "upgraded" to ones that Intel still makes. That makes sense, and makes this a zero update. Apple seems to have responded to the uproar with carefully leaked info that something is coming 2013 (Pogue has an on-the-record quote about a desktop line refresh in 2013, and a tcook email on Macrumors talks about "something really great coming later next year").

I think it's time to face the fact that there is no Sandy Bridge-EP Mac Pro coming, now or ever, and that "desktop line refresh" likely means that the MP as we know it is dead, to be replaced by something else. Maybe that something else is great, but it still means that Apple's competitors might get on to Haswell before Apple is off Nehalem.
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.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 08:36 AM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
I think it's time to face the fact that there is no Sandy Bridge-EP Mac Pro coming, now or ever, and that "desktop line refresh" likely means that the MP as we know it is dead, to be replaced by something else. Maybe that something else is great, but it still means that Apple's competitors might get on to Haswell before Apple is off Nehalem.
I don't think we can assume anything. We just know that the current update sucks.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 09:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
I don't think we can assume anything.
I agree. Apple could kill the MP, or they could replace it with an all-new 2U chassis, and I wouldn't be surprised in either direction. At the moment I'm only sure of two things. The Mac Pro isn't dead yet and, if Apple does exit the tower market, I believe they will make some kind of announcement about it.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 10:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
Apple could kill the MP, or they could replace it with an all-new 2U chassis, and I wouldn't be surprised in either direction.
Both of those amount to killing the MP as we know it. Noone knows what the replacement will be, but my point is that steady-as-she-goes upgrades based on Intel's midrange Xeons won't be happening. If Apple had an MP ready to go 2 months from now, they wouldn't have done anything today, even if those particular models were removed from Intel's price lists. A 2U server sounds nice, sure. I also know that the xMac fanatics are coming out from under their bridges and claiming that this would be the perfect time to kill both the MP and mini and making their beloved minitower, so that in an era when the fastest mobile GPU is finally catching up to high-end single-card desktop GPU, they can finally return to their joys of reflashing GPUs.

What's the use case for the MP today? More cores? Yes, but those are some expensive cores, and since the clockspeeds drop when you run all those cores, the returns are very much diminishing for desktop work. As a server? They're not ideal, and and you have seen Lion server, right? More powerful GPUs? That's obviously not something Apple focuses on if they keep using graphics cards that are 2 generations old. Lots of HD bays? Thunderbolt bay - or just USB, frankly.

I don't see where they're going with the line. The two things it can add over an iMac - powerful GPUs and lots of cores - were the two things they could have added now and didn't. One amusing little detail that I haven't seen anyone catch up on: According to various benchmarks I have been piecing together, the MBP now has a GPU that is more powerful than the one in the MP. It's probably within the margin of error, and I couldn't find a straight comparison of the two, but it looks like the GT650M is actually a little faster than the Radeon 5770 desktop. That's how far behind they are.
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.
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 10:46 AM
 
Some of you are talking about switching platforms, perhaps to a Dell.
I don't understand. Wouldn't the logical choice be to purchase an iMac?

Sure a Dell might be faster than the current MacPro, but you lose the Apple OS.
The OS is more important than the slight increases you will over the existing MacPro (in my opinion).

Even though its shitie that Apple didn't include Thunder and USB 3, the only option is to go iMac or wait. PC is not an option.
I eat turtle soup for breakfast
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 11:00 AM
 
I'm not switching, and I'm not traditionally a Mac Pro type anyway... because Apple charges a lot for the often crippled entry level.

However, although you and I wouldn't switch to Windows any time soon, I do know of some who have done so, partially because they can't plan their businesses around Apple's extremely secretive upgrade patterns, and partially because the cost of entry level towers on the Mac side is so damn high. There are some things you just can't easily do in an all-in-one like the iMac, which is why Apple likes it so much.

P.S. I do have both a Windows desktop (triple core AMD Acer) and a Windows laptop (dual-core Pentium SU4100 Acer) as well in my house. I prefer both my Mac desktop (iMac Core i7) and Mac laptop (13" C2D MacBook Pro), but I could go primarily Windows if I needed to. Windows 7 is actually decent, in contrast to Vista which I detest.
( Last edited by Eug; Jun 12, 2012 at 11:26 AM. )
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 11:17 AM
 
I run OS X, Windows and Linux at home. Windows 7 isn't that bad. But I still prefer OS X.

edit: I still stick to my prediction that, within ten years, the desktop as we know it will be dead. I don't think Apple will abandon its professional user base, but the way forward they offer may be a jarring transition.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 11:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
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.
They're shit to be buying now.

I'm sure they're working hard; my 2008 HTPC is doing OK too. But for a professional workstation you have to keep up. Pro digital photography went from 12MP to 25-36MP in the last couple year. Video moving from 2k to 4k. That's where you need those "useless benchmarks" to keep up the pace of your workflow. If you don't need to be on the leading edge of performance/capacity, and iMac is probably a better choice and value and gets a lot more attention from Apple.

Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
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.
Wasn't the high X1900 failure rate unique to the Mac Pro card?

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.
You're buying it because you're locked in with a large legacy investment and need to get work done. Don't get me wrong, I bought a couple X5600 servers last year because I couldn't wait for E5-2600 to come, and I knew it was a shit deal when I did it.

Originally Posted by P View Post
Siracusa points out on twitter that the CPUs that the MP used to use are no longer on Intel's price list, so they've "upgraded" to ones that Intel still makes.
Are the new ones on SIPP with 7 year availability? It's too hard to find the SIPP lists anymore, Intel just says contact your OEM.

Originally Posted by P View Post
so that in an era when the fastest mobile GPU is finally catching up to high-end single-card desktop GPU, they can finally return to their joys of reflashing GPUs.
What? Not even close.

And I'm not even thinking of GTX 690, which is a single card.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 11:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
They're shit to be buying now.

I'm sure they're working hard; my 2008 HTPC is doing OK too. But for a professional workstation you have to keep up. Pro digital photography went from 12MP to 25-36MP in the last couple year. Video moving from 2k to 4k. That's where you need those "useless benchmarks" to keep up the pace of your workflow. If you don't need to be on the leading edge of performance/capacity, and iMac is probably a better choice and value and gets a lot more attention from Apple.
And the current, and even older machines, can handle it. I know professional photographers who use 13-inch MBPs with no problems.

But, yeah, they're shit for value now. See my post above.

You're buying it because you're locked in with a large legacy investment and need to get work done. Don't get me wrong, I bought a couple X5600 servers last year because I couldn't wait for E5-2600 to come, and I knew it was a shit deal when I did it.
We're buying them because they work, and because the entire system works. Don't fix what ain't broken.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 12:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Are the new ones on SIPP with 7 year availability? It's too hard to find the SIPP lists anymore, Intel just says contact your OEM.
I don't know. I was actually looking for that info as well before I posted, but couldn't find anything.

Originally Posted by mduell View Post
What? Not even close.

And I'm not even thinking of GTX 690, which is a single card.
I meant single-GPU cards, sorry about that. The card I'm referencing is the GTX680M, which looks a lot like a GTX 670 except the video RAM is clocked way lower - something that is hardly the fault of the GPU itself and more of the power requirements of GDDR5. This is a significant difference from the last generation, when nVidia's GTX 580M was in essence an underclocked 560 Ti and AMD's 6990M was a 6870.

Put it this way: We're back to differences on the order of a CPU, desktop to mobile, and that has not been the case for several generations (OK, so the Radeon 4000 generation was like that, but it didn't really touch the top nVidia cards then). The arrival of graphics turbo will only serve to decrease this gap further.
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 Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Palo Alto, CA USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 12:17 PM
 
I find it hard to believe that the MP is waiting for a TB chassis. Who knows, maybe you are right, but of all the Macs, isn't the Mac Pro the easiest of all the Macs to incorporate new hardware, with the huge tower?
Knowing their logic, If Apple is going to make a workstation for Pros, they would sooner make a more advanced iMac than try to keep the MP alive.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 01:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eden Aurora View Post
Some of you are talking about switching platforms, perhaps to a Dell.
I don't understand. Wouldn't the logical choice be to purchase an iMac?
Or a Mac mini for those of us who can't stand glossy displays.

As for the Dell… eww, shouldn't a HP Z workstation a better option.?

Sure a Dell might be faster than the current MacPro, but you lose the Apple OS.
The OS is more important than the slight increases you will over the existing MacPro (in my opinion).
By not mention the pain of cross-licensing all your software. Adobe retail software is platform-specific. They will sell you a crossgrade but then your previous platform (the Mac) will not be able to run the software anymore. Adding insult to the injury, Adobe licensing policy applies to the software language as well.

PC is not an option.
PC is a mess. One day you're running Windows 7 32bit cause this is what your system came loaded with; later you need to run some 64bit specific software. You can't. You need to pay good money for a 64bit version of Windows and you feel robbed. The world has a noticeable population of villains !!!
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 01:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by angelmb View Post
PC is a mess. One day you're running Windows 7 32bit cause this is what your system came loaded with; later you need to run some 64bit specific software. You can't. You need to pay good money for a 64bit version of Windows and you feel robbed. The world has a noticeable population of villains !!!
All three of my PCs came with 64-bit Windows 7. They're a couple of years old now.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 03:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eden Aurora View Post
Some of you are talking about switching platforms, perhaps to a Dell.
I don't understand. Wouldn't the logical choice be to purchase an iMac?
For 99% of the people, an iMac or the new MBP is awesome.

I'm not part of that (admittedly large) group. I do visual effects work. The weaker the CPU and the GPU, the longer the project is going to take. It's really that simple. There's going to be time lost due to it being Windows instead of Mac, but that won't compare to the time lost in longer renders on every render I do across the life of the machine.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 03:49 PM
 
Apple retracted the New tag from the Mac Pro in their online store.

*sudden outburst of common sense*
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 04:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
I agree. Apple could kill the MP, or they could replace it with an all-new 2U chassis, and I wouldn't be surprised in either direction. At the moment I'm only sure of two things. The Mac Pro isn't dead yet and, if Apple does exit the tower market, I believe they will make some kind of announcement about it.

I don't understand the 2U chassis theory, if by that you are implying that it would be intended to be rackable. 2U is generally more expensive to rack than 1U, and they used to make a 1U. Why would Apple get back into making a rackable server in a larger configuration?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 04:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eden Aurora View Post
Some of you are talking about switching platforms, perhaps to a Dell.
I don't understand. Wouldn't the logical choice be to purchase an iMac?
How about Hackintosh?
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 04:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I don't understand the 2U chassis theory, if by that you are implying that it would be intended to be rackable. 2U is generally more expensive to rack than 1U, and they used to make a 1U. Why would Apple get back into making a rackable server in a larger configuration?
Because they wouldn't make any money on it. I think Apple did see some revenue on the G4/G5 XServes. They actually sold a large number to the Navy to use with the sonar software on submarines. But I don't think they sold many Intel XServes at all.
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, 04:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
How about Hackintosh?
I considered Hackintosh before buying my MP, but at the time the results were really hit and miss. Things may have improved since then.
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, 05:14 PM
 
Same here. I need stability.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 05:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
All three of my PCs came with 64-bit Windows 7. They're a couple of years old now.
Good for you, but this doesn't neglect the fact that some people like me had to pay twice:

a.- MBP Unibody with BootCamp running Windows 7 32bit, cause you know how bad XP 64bit was, so sure thing is to stick to Windows 32bit.
b.- Now, I need to run this very RAM hungry software. Well, just update the MBP to 8 GB RAM so it doesn't crawl at all and call it a day. Should work like it did under OS X.
c.- If only !! Now I have to upgrade buy a version of Windows 7 64 bit in order to get access to more than 2,something anemic GBs of RAM.

You already know how it works on the Mac side…
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 05:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I don't understand the 2U chassis theory, if by that you are implying that it would be intended to be rackable. 2U is generally more expensive to rack than 1U, and they used to make a 1U. Why would Apple get back into making a rackable server in a larger configuration?
Noise; you can probably get a 2U down to desktop like noise levels if you don't stuff too much in it (like a Mac Pro). 8 memory slots instead of 24, 4-6 drives instead of 14-24, etc.

Also with 2Us you can get 10kW in a rack, which is the power limit at most facilities. Any more density doesn't really help unless you're burning a lot of space on low power equipment.
( Last edited by mduell; Jun 12, 2012 at 05:40 PM. )
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 06:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Noise; you can probably get a 2U down to desktop like noise levels if you don't stuff too much in it (like a Mac Pro). 8 memory slots instead of 24, 4-6 drives instead of 14-24, etc.
Sure, but do you think Apple would care about this stuff? Is there demand for this kind of server?
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 06:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Sure, but do you think Apple would care about this stuff? Is there demand for this kind of server?
I don't think Apple really cares about the server space. However, if they could produce a new Mac Pro case which just happens to be 2U, then it might be worth their while.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 06:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
I don't think Apple really cares about the server space. However, if they could produce a new Mac Pro case which just happens to be 2U, then it might be worth their while.

I think I see your thinking, sort of kill two birds with one stone for those with these sorts of pro needs, but what about professionals that work out of their homes? They're not going to want to rack anything, right? Or, would this be more of a regular desktop machine that could also be racked rather than a 2U server first and foremost?
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 06:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
Because they wouldn't make any money on it. I think Apple did see some revenue on the G4/G5 XServes. They actually sold a large number to the Navy to use with the sonar software on submarines. But I don't think they sold many Intel XServes at all.
They sold volume of G4 and G5 Xserves because at the time the architecture meant they did some things a whole lot better than x86 CPUs. The Altivec unit made the G4s better at dealing with vector calculations and then the G5 was the first 64-bit chip on the mainstream market allowing higher RAM ceilings and other computational advantages.

The Intel Xserve was no better than anything Dell or HP could put out in terms of theoretical performance at least so for tasks like supercomputers where the OS was largely irrelevant, they lost out to cheaper hardware with identical performance, or to hardware that was better because HP and Dell would update theirs weekly if Intel gave them CPUs to do it with and Apple were often way behind them.

The advantage of a 2U rack mount Mac Pro is that it does the job of the current Mac Pro when you put it on or under a desk but also provides a viable alternative to those who were using Xserves for their OS rather than just raw performance. It kills two birds with one stone. The Thunderbolt chassis is partly wishful thinking that we might get a nice alternative to the Xserve RAID at long last (even if that bit is left to Promise) or a box of external PCI-E cards and partly to let some of the expandability be outsourced to a second box in order to shrink the Mac Pro enclosure.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 06:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Or, would this be more of a regular desktop machine that could also be racked rather than a 2U server first and foremost?
This. A regular desktop machine which, ZOMG!, just happens to fit into a 2U rack!

In addition they can sell it in a server config: lots of storage, minimal GPU and (please, God) two power supplies.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 06:45 PM
 
The other thing thunderbolt potentially lets you do is just put the display on your desk and maybe some other storage or capture cards, but put your actual workstation in a rack. You could have a room full of Mac Pros without having them in the room, meaning you can ramp up the fans without bothering the sound guys, and use Xgrid to turn the stack into a render farm without sounding like a wind turbine which makes final cut nicer in places where not everyone is rendering at once.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 07:54 PM
 
Tim Cook confirms updated Mac Pro coming in 2013

Great to know that Apple will release the new MacPro December 31st, 2013 and not a second sooner!
I eat turtle soup for breakfast
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Nashua NH, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 09:44 PM
 
It wouldn't really matter if it was 2u or 5u as long as it was easily rackable. The 5.25 bay for the CDROM determines the minimum width (aka height.)
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 10:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
The other thing thunderbolt potentially lets you do is just put the display on your desk and maybe some other storage or capture cards, but put your actual workstation in a rack. You could have a room full of Mac Pros without having them in the room, meaning you can ramp up the fans without bothering the sound guys, and use Xgrid to turn the stack into a render farm without sounding like a wind turbine which makes final cut nicer in places where not everyone is rendering at once.
Maximum Thunderbolt cable length is 3 metres for the current copper cables. Optical cables don't exist yet.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 10:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV View Post
It wouldn't really matter if it was 2u or 5u as long as it was easily rackable. The 5.25 bay for the CDROM determines the minimum width (aka height.)
Except that it costs more to rack 5U.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 10:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV View Post
It wouldn't really matter if it was 2u or 5u as long as it was easily rackable. The 5.25 bay for the CDROM determines the minimum width (aka height.)


Optical drive bay on the right. Note the drive bay on the iMacs are already vertical, and even the usual tray load desktop optical drives run fine vertically.

The problem with 1U or 2U though is that designing it for internal cards would be that much harder.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 10:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
The problem with 1U or 2U though is that designing it for internal cards would be that much harder.
I think Apple might be able to pull off 2U. There's a lot of empty space in my Mac Pro.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 10:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
The problem with 1U or 2U though is that designing it for internal cards would be that much harder.
Howso? The Dell 2Us have 7 PCIe slots:
One x16 full-length, full-height
Three x8 full-length, full-height
Three x8 half-length, half-height
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 11:15 PM
 
Yeah but how loud is it? Remember, these would actually be used as towers. I figured we weren't just talking about pure rack servers.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Nashua NH, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 11:42 PM
 
Optical drive bay on the right. Note the drive bay on the iMacs are already vertical, and even the usual tray load desktop optical drives run fine vertically.

The problem with 1U or 2U though is that designing it for internal cards would be that much harder.
Thats a dedicated rack layout, its too thin to be stable and way too long. For use as a tower it needs to be wide enough for a cdrom drive and shallow enough to fit on / under a desk. To do that and still rack it means 4U I think. Don't know the U to inches. The iMacs get away with it because they have this giant foot to stabilize them, the screen masks the width, people don't put them in racks that block the sides, and they don't have any expandability. The Mac Pro is the inverse of all these things.

Except that it costs more to rack 5U.
Sorry but if they even keep the mac pro high density server farms are not a consideration. Still has to be cheaper than racking the current tower in what 15U?
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2012, 12:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV View Post
Thats a dedicated rack layout, its too thin to be stable and way too long. For use as a tower it needs to be wide enough for a cdrom drive and shallow enough to fit on / under a desk. To do that and still rack it means 4U I think. Don't know the U to inches. The iMacs get away with it because they have this giant foot to stabilize them, the screen masks the width, people don't put them in racks that block the sides, and they don't have any expandability. The Mac Pro is the inverse of all these things.
The optical drive is irrelevant cuz it can be used vertically. You only need 1U to house an optical drive.

As for the foot, it can be attached. My slimline cheapo PCs are meant to sit flat on the table, but can be used upright with the foot attachment.

However, my prediction is that Apple has completely abandoned the high end server. It's happy enough with the Mac mini servers. The new tower will be... a tower.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2012, 01:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
The new tower will be... a tower.
I think so too.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2012, 02:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by Eden Aurora View Post
Tim Cook confirms updated Mac Pro coming in 2013

Great to know that Apple will release the new MacPro December 31st, 2013 and not a second sooner!
Keep the faith Eden !!

Take a look at the Apple Store, Apple has removed the 'New' tag from Mac Pro's online store listing. Someone's been messing with Auto Save and Versions at the online Store !!

     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2012, 10:30 AM
 
Apple has definitely noticed the Mac Pro users this time - that Wrath stole so much attention from the retina MBP, which made this an expensive mistake to make.
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.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2012, 10:34 AM
 
It's weird when Apple gets caught completely letting down a core segment of its user base. You always wonder how it could happen to a corporation run so well by so many geniuses, yet every so often Apple manages to screw up in minor but significant ways that should not be possible. It's like Apple has huge blind spots despite being so great. It would have been less of an insult to just quietly axe the Mac Pro all together than to do what Apple did to Mac Pro customers at WWDC. Amazing stuff.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2012, 11:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
Apple has definitely noticed the Mac Pro users this time - that Wrath stole so much attention from the retina MBP, which made this an expensive mistake to make.
Sorry, but this sounds like wishful thinking on your part. I've already seen a lot of press coverage of the new MBPs, with comments about overdue MP updates limited to tech sites.

Let's be honest: Apple could completely dump the MP and not even see a hit to their bottom line.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Nashua NH, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2012, 11:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
Let's be honest: Apple could completely dump the MP and not even see a hit to their bottom line.
That's because no one has bought a Mac Pro in a fiscal year.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2012, 11:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
Let's be honest: Apple could completely dump the MP and not even see a hit to their bottom line.
True, in the short run. However, I think existence of the Mac Pro has some symbolic meaning as well to some people running Mac-based businesses. Psychologically it's comforting to some that Apple hasn't completely dumped the higher end. It's easier to justify jumping to another platform if Apple has no higher end machines at all.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2012, 12:01 PM
 
The Mac Pro is not a core market. It is a fringe market.

It was a core market in the early 2000s, and it was the ONLY market in the mid-to-late 1990s, but in an age where a two thousand dollar laptop is a complete production and editing studio, the big iron tower is relegated to a very small market.

Somewhat symbolic, yes, but honestly: the vast majority of Apple's bread-and-butter customers have no idea Apple even MAKES towers.

To the public, a "Mac Pro" is a silver laptop.
     
 
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 03:22 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2014 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2