A Flood of Fawning Reviews For Apple's Latest 501
Like many other review sites, it seems that MacWorld can hardly find enough good things to say about the new Mac Pro, even while conceding it's probably not right for many users. 9to5 Mac has assembled a lot of the early reviews, including The Verge's, which has one of the coolest shots of its nifty design, which stacks up well against the old Pro's nifty design. The reviews mostly boil down to this: If you're in a field where you already make use of a high-end Mac for tasks like video editing, the newest one lives up to its hype.
It's pretty neat (Score:4, Insightful)
I read the review on the Mac CAD site a few days ago. They go into the GPU performance, and it looks like if you need the GPU offerings they are bundling, it's not a horrible deal. One supposes if you're into something specific like Mac CAD, then your CAD software will be updated to take advantage of that specific hardware, because it's a closed ecosystem. If you're an architect invested in a Mac workflow, then dropping $2-3K per year on your main desktop doesn't sound horrible.
As a no-longer-an-Apple-guy, I might be interested in seeing a standards develop for commodity parts that used the tower cooling design. My big old LianLi Al case certainly takes up too much desk space. Then again, I should stick it in a closet and use a KVM extender, shouldn't I?
Video editing... (Score:4, Insightful)
The whole superiority of Apple might have been true many years ago, but now it's just nonsense. You can get a Windows machine with the same hardware specs for half the price with the same software (unless you insist on using Final Cut).
Video editing in particular is a poor example, as it doesn't have critical latency requirements - and pretty much all recent benchmarks show that Windows does a little better across the board.
Audio is a better example, because on an unmodified Windows install, live audio WILL have worse latency and WILL have a very high chance of dropouts when compared to Apple. A tweaked Windows install will be on par.
I am no MS shill - I just believe in using the right tool for the job, and fanboys by definition don't believe in facts.
Re:Advancing in what direction? (Score:3, Insightful)
I do video editing and while I don't current need a new workstation, I see no problem with it. Neither me, nor my colleagues keep anything internal. All work goes on external or networked drives.
Re:Advancing in what direction? (Score:4, Insightful)
I think you hit the nail on the head. It would be nice to have had the canister Mac Pro be sold as a workstation, and the old tower with the ability to use expansion cards be made into a case that could function as a tower, or rack ears attached and put in that way.
Heck, Compaq was able to do this with some of their Deskpros in the mid-1990s (IIRC), and Sun had kits for this for various Ultra models... I don't see why Apple couldn't offer this, so they have at least some presence in a server room without a major hassle.
This cylinder looks cool, but for someone with FPGA boards [1], being limited to the relatively few PCIe lanes that Thunderbolt exposes to the breakout box will be a hurdle compared to just sticking the card into the case and going from there.
[1]: Not for BitCoin mining, although when not in use, that has come to mind.
Re:Video editing... (Score:4, Insightful)
You are confusing tools for professionals with overpriced doo-dads intended to fool other people into believing that you are wealthy.
MacWorld weren't that positive (Score:5, Insightful)
Looks gimmicky, seems massively over-priced. I'm sure there's a market for it...
3.5GHz quad core for $3000? Way overpriced. (Score:1, Insightful)
I was given $3000 to spend on a desktop Mac, I'd be hard-pressed to pick the entry-level Mac Pro instead of a 27-inch iMac with 3.5GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 processor, 32GB of RAM, a 3TB Fusion Drive, and an Nvidia GeForce GTX 780M GPU.
Unimpressive specs for the price. I'm writing this on a 3.2GHz 4-core Intel i5-4570 CPU, with an Nvidia GeForce GT 640. Running Linux. Cost under $1000. I could have ordered a machine with the components Apple is installing for a few hundred more. The CPU upgrade would cost $116 and the GPU upgrade about $225. The GTX 780M isn't even NVidia's top-of-the-line GPU; that's a mobile (for laptops) part, three or four steps down from the top of the line.
Re:Advancing in what direction? (Score:5, Insightful)
Because it's not a piece of art. It's a tool.
If you read the Verge article it talks about Apple having talked with people and horror stories of people sawing the handles off their old Mac Pros so they could fit into a rackmount.
This is kind of important for crews with large amounts of equipment, as hand-carrying every...individual...component...is about the stupidest possible way to do it. Being able to rack a complete solution just makes more sense. You drop the case where it needs to go, plug it into power and a monitor and go.
With the new version, you pull out your "case O' stuff", unpack the Mac. Unpack the first peripheral, unpack the second peripheral, unpack the third peripheral...and so on. Y'know, DUMB.
Apple may have listened. But they apparently didn't hear a damn thing.
Re:Advancing in what direction? (Score:5, Insightful)
With upwards of 32GB sitting on one DIMM these days, ever think there might not be a need for 16 fucking DIMM slots anymore? Just a thought.
This makes the dangerous assumption that the memory needs of applications will remain the same going into the future. In three or four years when applications make use of more memory, you will be buying a new Macintosh. Oh, I see how that works.
Re:Advancing in what direction? (Score:5, Insightful)
Customers telling Apple what they want is not Apple's business model.
Re: Video editing... (Score:5, Insightful)
Add to that, the Mac Pro only consumes 450w versus the Dell's 1500w,
Neither computer even draws anywhere close to 450w in normal operation, probably closer to 150w at idle, and maybe a little higher when working. You have amusingly confused a lower quality PSU to a much higher quality one, and in true Apple fashion picked which ever one goes in the Macintosh as better. The Apple has lower peak power needs because it has no internal expansion space, so instead you will be bleeding power from the various wall warts and power dongles that come with external accessories.
Re: Video editing... (Score:4, Insightful)
Having a 450w PSU vs 1500w PSU doesn't mean that your computer will actually consume that much electricity.
That said if you're insistent on buying the Apple is rather proves the point that intelligence is really not a required attribute of the buyers of that system.
Re:Sheer ridiculous stupidity... (Score:2, Insightful)
Stupidity is bringing up the same tired "Mac Pro is overpriced" while not providing one provable real-world system that can be made cheaper to the 1/2 - 1/4 price discount. Everyone parting one together ALWAYS has compromises.
You guys talk a lot, but say little.
Re:$3k (Score:5, Insightful)
You need to look a lot closer at the specs...
The video cards are really dumb (Score:5, Insightful)
Since they aren't upgradable. The thing is video cards get obsolete quicker than the rest of a system. This looks like it may be starting to change, but so far, they are the component that benefits from the most frequent updates. You want to buy less video card more often for optimal performance. This is true for gaming, 3D visualization, CUDA, whatever.
Well here you've two high end cards, which would imply high end tasks... and no way to replace them when the time comes. That is not a good situation. I mean I suppose you can replace the whole system, but that is rather wasteful. It is also predicated on a new replacement being available and Apple has shown a lack of interest in keeping the Mac Pro line up to date.
To me, this looks more like a shiny toy that people want to show off. "Oh look, I have the most powerful system EVAR! It is amazing!" rather than any consideration of usefulness for a workset, which is what a workstation should be.
Also what the people who are playing the price comparison minuta game miss is that yes, it isn't a bad price provided you need precisely what it is providing, but as the parent pointed out that is rare. The idea with an expensive workstation should be you get the components you need, not the ones you don't. Two GPUs might be great for videogames, they are useless for 3D EM simulation. Conversely 64GB is more than you can use for any game, but is entry level for 3D EM work, you could use 256GB or more for many simulations.
When you are spending multi-thousands on a workstation, it really should be custom to order. The money should go where it is useful to your application set. Trying to have an "everything and the kitchen sink" approach and then saying everyone should meet that is silly.
Re:Video editing... (Score:5, Insightful)
[quote]
You are confusing tools for professionals with overpriced doo-dads intended to fool other people into believing that you are wealthy.
[/quote]
Annual cost of a dog: $695 (http://xkcd.com/980/)
Cost of an iPhone: $699
A daily pack of cigarettes per year: $3,050
Cost of a Mac Pro: $2,999
Ergo, Apple products do not make you look wealthy.
Re:Not a great value, in my opinion (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, if you don't put your computer in a miniature trashcan, you can install a more efficient cooling system.
Re: Advancing in what direction? (Score:2, Insightful)
Crusty Solaris admin here, I'd like to correct you. Intel architecture people generally don't care about relevant specifications, for desktops, workstations, or servers.
"Intel is cheaper" is all I ever hear when tasked with comparing Intel to not-Intel. Intel keeps slowly adding SPARC-level RAS features, but their customers wouldn't even know it. These are the same people who buy Cisco fibre channel gear with 8-1 oversubscription... without knowing what they are getting.
So, it's unfair to single out Macs as if the people running other Intel workstations or servers think twice about shoving a four port fibre channel adapter just wherever it fits or piping their backup and primary storage IO over the same lanes.
Re:Advancing in what direction? (Score:5, Insightful)
For everyone except the professionals there really is no need for a tower anymore. I see more and more people using laptops instead of desktop peecee's. It's a niche market nowadays.
Well sure, but in my experience most of the people who want the tower want it for the expandability factor.
Otherwise, why bother paying a premium for what is essentially a laptop, except you can't take it anywhere?
Re:Will it blend? (Score:2, Insightful)
Which is taking a giant swipe at the "pro" packages out there that are slowly having their lunch eaten by Blender. Maya and the others are no longer the "standard" in hollywood and TV. I love that common people can buy a dirt cheap workstation like the MacPro and a dirt cheap $6000 camera+lenses and shoot/edit/produce a movie as good as hollywood could on a $5,000,000 budget.
Indie TV shows like Mars One, Shows like Breaking Bad were done on a small budget, etc...
This next year, short of good writing and good actors, a young adult can easily get enough gear and money together to make a movie that will rival even Michael Bay explosion fests.
Re: Will it blend? (Score:4, Insightful)
Maya and Flame are not as well. So this gives Blender a HUGE advantage over those Multi thousand dollar packages.
Re:Not a great value, in my opinion (Score:4, Insightful)
Final Cut Pro X changed the game significantly which upset all the entrenched pros. The changes take relearning and people do not like that unless they were really upset with their previous workflow (like everybody was before FCP, even Avid which was great but it cost way too much!) People liked their FCP 7 workflow.
The main reason pros were upset with Final Cut Pro is they removed all the hardware and high end features from the software. Your expensive camera gear was rendered useless because FCPX was file based and didn't care about film or magnetic tapes which all the pros had much more money invested in. The Mac and FCP is cheap compared to all the other gear.
Pros who make $$ think little of blowing $10k on a new workstation. Apple ALWAYS has high end configurations for people who just want the maxed out system and money is not an issue...
As for the base models, Apple has always had static pricing and rarely lowers price points during the life of the model. When they introduce something it usually has a fair market price with the PC world, on rare occasions it is better. I've spec'd out PCs with the same stuff and they can come out to be more-- usually because Apple has some unusual option that costs a bundle to replicate. I can't buy workstation cards like those for the prices apple is getting them at. I have a workstation card NOW and even though it is 6 years old it beats the stock GPUs that come with many new consumer machines.
When I was in the tv industry, we would retask or just resell the mac -- macs have crazy resale value! You don't need to upgrade anything, just buy new and ebay the old model-- it'll cost you less, if you value your time-- I've had times where it only cost $250 to upgrade to the newer mac. Also, the benefits of going from a $1500 GPU to the next $1500 every year are not usually worth it... (but selling the old card it likely going to cost you as much as if you just did the whole mac at the same time.)
Re:Advancing in what direction? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why are you shooting holes in his imaginary use cases? Don't you know Apple has to sell a computer for every category out there?! If not, Apple is doomed! DOOMED I TELL YOU!!!!
Re:Advancing in what direction? (Score:5, Insightful)
But "weight and thin" on a phone or laptop are not aesthetics, they are FEATURES. Good features that most people want.
Weight and thin, on the other hand, are not particularly useful features on a workstation. There, on the other hand, they are mostly aesthetics...
Re:Advancing in what direction? (Score:4, Insightful)
Couple things to note. What are you comparing this to? An average Dell/HP PC or a proper "workstation" from these companies like the HP Z820? Because if you are comparing a regular desktop, you're not comparing Apples to Apples here (pardon the pun). Chances are if you aren't looking at the Z820
In the industries these machines are used in and targeted towards have moved to external storage arrays/SANS/NAS. What the internal hard drive(s) have doesn't matter so long as it's enough to install their main programs on. Even the smaller shops I know doing video production have at least a 20TB array, most are around 50TB these days.
When you start comparing the MacPro's against machines like the Z820 the MacPro's pricing is competitive. I believe the Z820 with a single 3GB Nvidia Quadro card is around $4k.