[BLAZE_MkIV]

Originally Posted by pooka 

I can't wait for the Mac Pro pricing shoe-drop. I seriously doubt many/any of you will be first in line to purchase. It's absurd that you can assemble a beast of a hackintosh system for roughly $800 that literally destroys any production machine Apple has to offer (unless you drop north of $5k). And even then, you can add $500 nodes to gobble up Compressor jobs like you wouldn't believe. There is no (end user) justification for this, but I'm sure someone here will step up to the plate.

I'm guessing you're comparing their current shipping hardware with the several generations old cpu's to a new i7?

[pooka]

Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV 

I'm guessing you're comparing their current shipping hardware with the several generations old cpu's to a new i7?

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking. I guess it works either way? A beast of a hackintosh system vs the current Mac Pro or a maxed out quad i7 iMac (with substandard glossy screen that can't compete with a $300 ASUS ProArt panel). I'm guess I'm comparing it to any other available option? I'm merely stating that it sucks that my dumb ass can slap together some commodity parts and smoke anything that Apple is willing to sell me (south of $5k). It sure would be nice to have a badass prosumer system to go with all the prosumer software Apple's releasing.

I can BTO an iMac that comes close for roughly $2700, but the hackintosh still wins and costs $1900 less. I guess it's not an oranges to oranges, but what other avenue of comparison do we have? What justification is there for this MASSIVE hole in their lineup?

[BLAZE_MkIV]

Originally Posted by pooka 

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking. I guess it works either way? A beast of a hackintosh system vs the current Mac Pro or a maxed out quad i7 iMac (with substandard glossy screen that can't compete with a $300 ASUS ProArt panel). I'm guess I'm comparing it to any other available option? I'm merely stating that it sucks that my dumb ass can slap together some commodity parts and smoke anything that Apple is willing to sell me (south of $5k). It sure would be nice to have a badass prosumer system to go with all the prosumer software Apple's releasing.

I'm asking if you're comparing the price of a home built i7 rig with the MacPro which is several CPU generations behind.

Originally Posted by pooka 

I can BTO an iMac that comes close for roughly $2700, but the hackintosh still wins and costs $1900 less. I guess it's not an oranges to oranges, but what other avenue of comparison do we have? What justification is there for this MASSIVE hole in their lineup?

There is no hole. You don't build something you can't sell (in volume). You want a i7 in a cheap white box case there are places you can buy that. " We can't ship junk" Steve.

[pooka]

Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV 

There is no hole. You don't build something you can't sell (in volume). You want a i7 in a cheap white box case there are places you can buy that. " We can't ship junk" Steve.

I love this. "There is no hole" according to whom? You? Apple? This is oddly similar to the 9.7" iPad is perfectly fine. "There is no hole" with regards to a smaller/cheaper device. The same with the iPhone. "If you don't like it, go buy a Dell"

I never said I wanted a "cheap white box". Charge a freaking premium for a prosumer system. Why is it that Apple develops/integrates all of these resources (Open GL, Open CL, CUDA, etc) and applications (FCP, Compressor, X-grid) and insists that I "maximize" the potential with a ****ing mobile GPU? I'm merely lamenting the fact that regardless of my willingness to pay, I'm not even given the option. All you're doing is making excuses. I'll continue along the path of trying to solve my problems and encourage companies to listen to my grievances while you insinuate that I'm silly for having them. Eat what you're given. I'll bitch and encourage them try harder. I'm fully aware that I can switch to Windows if I don't like it. I'd PREFER to stay in this ecosystem. I don't get the mindset of telling someone to "**** off" if their preferences don't align with a corporation's current strategy. What harm does it cause if me/others are presented with an OPTION.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Yes, you.

Stand still, laddie!

I was only trying to express my frustration with those that extrapolate their needs to the needs of the majority, then chastise Apple for not meeting those needs.

[starman]

Aren't Hackintoshes a pain to maintain? When I was looking into them a year or two ago, that was the impression I got of them. Every time there was a software update there was the danger of not being able to use it, or something.

[P]

Every now and then a software update breaks something, so basically you turn off the automatic one and watch Mac news sites for when there are updates, and hold off for a while to let the guinea pigs determine if they break Hackintoshes or not.

That said, I haven't had a Hackintosh running in years either, so maybe the last instance of that was long ago.

[BLAZE_MkIV]

Originally Posted by pooka 

I'm merely lamenting the fact that regardless of my willingness to pay

This is why I specifically added volume to my statement. You're the 1% of the 4%. You can't make a living selling to that kind of market segment.

[Mike Wuerthele]

Originally Posted by P 

Every now and then a software update breaks something, so basically you turn off the automatic one and watch Mac news sites for when there are updates, and hold off for a while to let the guinea pigs determine if they break Hackintoshes or not.

That said, I haven't had a Hackintosh running in years either, so maybe the last instance of that was long ago.

This seems pretty accurate. I'm not sure I'd ever use a Hackintosh for a production machine. If I used one in the past, I may have just propped it up in a corner to iTunes serve, and other such tasks.

[subego]

Even before hackintoshes, it's often SOP on high-end gear not to run an update until a project is complete.

Very much an "if it ain't broke" policy.

[pooka]

Originally Posted by EstaNightshift 

This seems pretty accurate. I'm not sure I'd ever use a Hackintosh for a production machine. If I used one in the past, I may have just propped it up in a corner to iTunes serve, and other such tasks.

I've 14 running off and on in a production environment. The trick is/was getting a stable build which has been extensively tested by the hackintosh community. As far as stability goes, mine have been rock solid for over a year* (with the exception of two SSD failures) and my "beast" currently serves as my primary workstation. I just got sick of shelling out for Mac Pros when we're seeing much better real world performance out of these (occasionally overclocked) 3770Ks. On top of that, we can use higher end prosumer NVIDIA GPUs out of the box that "real" macs can't. Seriously, the disparity in performance with CUDA apps is kind of absurd.


*overall system stability has been fine. I even have thunderbolt and usb3 on my pro that the official systems currently lack. The only issue that has been problematic recently is Apple's insistence on breaking iMessage compatibility. Even then, it's a minor inconvenience.

[pooka]

Originally Posted by subego 

Even before hackintoshes, it's often SOP on high-end gear not to run an update until a project is complete.

Very much an "if it ain't broke" policy.

Uh, yeah. Auto-updates are killed as soon as new machines are configured in my shops.

[pooka]

Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV 

This is why I specifically added volume to my statement. You're the 1% of the 4%. You can't make a living selling to that kind of market segment.

Your argument makes little to no sense. I would imagine the ridiculous niche the revamped Mac Pro (with two soldered in FirePro cards) will serve is significantly smaller market than the prosumers they are effectively dumbing down all of their "pro" applications for. I assume they don't want to cannibalize iMac sales. Again, your argument makes less sense because they could have simply revamped an Intel reference board (like they have in the past), slapped it into the existing pro case and called it a day. But hey, that's not how they roll...

Maybe they'll make a living selling to an even SMALLER pro market.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by pooka 

I*overall system stability has been fine. I even have thunderbolt and usb3 on my pro that the official systems currently lack. The only issue that has been problematic recently is Apple's insistence on breaking iMessage compatibility. Even then, it's a minor inconvenience.

Yeah, and it took, what, a whole week before they came out with an update to Chimera that fixed this issue?

[pooka]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Yeah, and it took, what, a whole week before they came out with an update to Chimera that fixed this issue?

Actually, that is not the case. A lot of users have been experiencing issues since early August. The "fix" only works if you have one hackintosh system associated with an Apple ID. There are some workarounds, but it's going to take a more significant update to nvram hacks they have in place.

[Laminar]

Interesting. The new Chimera fixed it for me, but I guess I only have one Hack on my AppleID.

[P]

Originally Posted by pooka 

Your argument makes little to no sense. I would imagine the ridiculous niche the revamped Mac Pro (with two soldered in FirePro cards) will serve is significantly smaller market than the prosumers they are effectively dumbing down all of their "pro" applications for.

Apparently they think different(ly). Since they probably have better access to market data, my bet is on Apple over you here.

Originally Posted by pooka 

I assume they don't want to cannibalize iMac sales.

Why not? The MP has always been higher margin than the iMac - significantly so.

Originally Posted by pooka 

Again, your argument makes less sense because they could have simply revamped an Intel reference board (like they have in the past), slapped it into the existing pro case and called it a day.

They still need to test and certify it and support it for years. Since Apple has so few models, each one they add is a significant additional support burden.

(That said, I do think they should have made an update of the current case to Sandy Bridge-EP to tide everyone over, but this is where Apple's policy of never downgrading a spec comes in. Two sockets Sandy Bridge-EP amounts to 16 cores, and the Ivy Bridge-EP is only 12. Limiting it to a single socket means a downgrade from the 12 cores in the current Westmere box. The only option then would be to do a new two-socket board but not offer the octocore models, but if they had done that, you know the wailing and grinding of teeth would have filled the interwebs).

Originally Posted by pooka 

But hey, that's not how they roll...

Maybe they'll make a living selling to an even SMALLER pro market.

If the new model sells to fewer customers, they'll kill it. This is the last chance for the MP. Just going on like they have is not an option, because they don't sell.

[pooka]

Originally Posted by P 

Apparently they think different(ly). Since they probably have better access to market data, my bet is on Apple over you here.

Well duh. I'm an admitted retard that literally knows less than your average garden shrew. I look to people such as yourself for explanations of Apple's divine intention. For you have your beliefs and I'm forced to rely on easily refutable patterns of behavior.

Originally Posted by P 

They still need to test and certify it and support it for years. Since Apple has so few models, each one they add is a significant additional support burden.

No doubt an arduous task for the largest corporation that has ever existed.

Originally Posted by P 

If the new model sells to fewer customers, they'll kill it. This is the last chance for the MP. Just going on like they have is not an option, because they don't sell.

Yeah. I know. They'll simply Xserve it.

So which is it? It's the most profitable line of machines or it's destined for EOL because they don't sell? I mean, they could ASK what their prospective customers actually want instead of rehashing the Cube. I love how this endless string of defenders line up to state "have faith, brother" in response to the PERFECTLY VALID CONCERNS of industry professionals who have increasingly gotten the hint that they no longer butter the bread. I love listening to all of this speculation on behalf of armchair market researchers shouting in defense of the obvious (to everyone but the oblivious) direction the company has taken. The so-called deep pockets of all these HIGH END graphics shops and VFX companies who will undoubtably have no problem spending inordinate chunks of change on these new systems, break-out boxes, Thunderbolt2 enclosures (which are gimped compared to a simple ****ing SLOT) and the lengths of optical cabling required to make it all talk. Because everyone of you KNOWS the intricacies of their workflows and they're already using *insert googled results for "high-end SAN" here*. No, let's completely overlook the recent brew-ha-ha that exploded over the internet about the ever increasing downward pressure on vfx and editing shops throughout the industry and the fact that MORE AND MORE are having to rely on equipment rentals to offset their production losses and retain their highly skilled/trained yet poorly respected personnel that are continually shat upon by their clientele and now... their vendors. Film, music and interactive productions are moving in DROVES to places like North Carolina and Louisiana for the skilled labor force and cutting edge infrastructure of course.

I can easily see how your tea leaves are at odds with my asinine concerns. I realize my tirade in no way refutes any of your statements or line of thinking. I'm perfectly willing to admit that *I MAY BE WRONG*. I'm sick of know-it-alls (Gruber Juniors™) condescending attempts to explain it to me in spite of the actual mother****ing sentiment in the "industry". In Apple We/You Trust.

[Spheric Harlot]

Apple are not the largest corporation that has ever existed. Not by a LOOOOOOONG shot.

They are the most VALUABLE corporation (or one thereof, depending upon current market cap).

There is a huge difference between the two.

Apple does NOT have a lot of personnel, for the money they make. They cannot just throw people at a project for the hell of it, and they don't. They use their resources — both money and personnel — in an extremely focused way.

[pooka]

Ok... I'll concede that point to you. It seems like an overly pedantic take on the overall sentiment I expressed, but I'm cat-****er enough to admit my incorrect assessment or presentation of facts.

In general though, I'll defer to the well established pattern of behavior that has been displayed to date versus any sort of hopes or assurances from the community. Like when you told me to relax about Quicktime X and how "any day now" they would restore all of the missing functionality. Eh... No offense, but your faith and rationalizations don't pay the bills.