62 replies to this topic

[mattw]

Well it looks like the rumours were fairly accurate then

I'm sure it will be a great machine for a few users (the CPUS and PCI-E flash storage is great) i.e, those that need mainly CPU or OpenCL performance but not lots of local storage.

Those GPUs are more for 3D rendering and compute operations like the BTO Quadro cards offered for past models and likely far too expensive for gaming. I also imagine upgrading the GPU will be difficult and with even more limited options looking at the design.

Guess I need to make this 09 machine last until the GPU in the iMac is far more powerful - I really want to run everything at native resolution with all options turned on, which I know the current model can mostly do now but I'm sure it won't in 4 or 5 years time and upgrading iMacs every couple of years is a lot more hassle and expensive that just buying another graphics card.

When Apple do fit a more powerful GPU in the iMac they will probably increase the native screen resolution anyway so the same problem always returns.

There seems to be less demand for higher capacity disks these days so I've not got much chance of getting anywhere near even my current 13TB of storage in an iMac and as already mentioned external means more mess, noise and space taken up.

Oh and I can't be sure but unless that audio out doubles up as an optical out it looks like I'd loose support for my 5.1 speakers as well so no more DD and DTS.

[Hansi]

First one to do a R2D2 case mod wins two internets.

[Diablofett]

The thing looks like a futuristic trash can...

http://www.macrumors...he-new-mac-pro/




And here is a drawing by someone whom possesses more artistic ability than Apple's current design team...

[Frigidman™]

THink I replaced a couple of those faulty nodes in Star Wars TOR on a few newbie missions....

[Sneaky Snake]

I really like the new Mac Pro, they said in the Keynote it's more upgradable then the previous generation, and I'm sure they'll be normal graphics cards as an option. That said, that base price is going to be like $5k. Dual Fire Pro Cards standard adds some cost.

[Matt Diamond]

mattw, on 10 June 2013 - 02:07 PM, said:

Well it looks like the rumours were fairly accurate then

Yeah, I couldn't have been more wrong.

On the plus side, CNN just called and offered me a job. "A man with your track record for accuracy should feel right at home on our network" the guy said. That's a direct quote! Although I also paraphrased it.


Update: they just read about how I somehow quoted yet paraphrased their recruiter and doubled their salary offer on the spot. "Please don't join CBS" the guy said.

[Frost]

Things that stand out in my mind:

• How much RAM will this have with 4 slots? Apple mentions OSX Mavericks supports 128GB of RAM (finally), but will you be able to do 128GB with those four slots? That may be excessive RAM for most people, but there are engineers who regularly put 64-96GB of RAM to use in current Mac Pros. I've done builds/upgrades for them. Nevermind what film pros do.
  
• How much capacity are these SSDs going to have? You can inexpensively put 16TB in a current Mac Pro, and then boot the thing off a 2TB PCIe SSD. In other words, crazy internal storage. This new setup better offer multi-terabyte at a reasonable price.
  
• AMD FirePro, whatever. AMD doesn't do CUDA apps. Will there be nVidia BTO alternatives?
  
• Will these blades they're using be swappable for future upgrades? Obviously they're a proprietary Apple design, but can I pull out the blade that holds the GPU and drop in a new one in two years that has a better GPU? Or are we going for a batpopsnizzle fraking insane "throw your $8000 Mac Pro away every couple years" setup that effectively zero pros are going to go for?

Also, if we're going to go all-Thunderbolt, let's see an all-in-one Thunderbolt chassis with dual disc drives, 4 HDD bays, and at least 2 PCIe slots please.
Peripheral clutter sucks.

[The Liberator]

Frost, on 10 June 2013 - 10:53 PM, said:

Things that stand out in my mind:

• How much RAM will this have with 4 slots? Apple mentions OSX Mavericks supports 128GB of RAM (finally), but will you be able to do 128GB with those four slots? That may be excessive RAM for most people, but there are engineers who regularly put 64-96GB of RAM to use in current Mac Pros. I've done builds/upgrades for them. Nevermind what film pros do.
  
• How much capacity are these SSDs going to have? You can inexpensively put 16TB in a current Mac Pro, and then boot the thing off a 2TB PCIe SSD. In other words, crazy internal storage. This new setup better offer multi-terabyte at a reasonable price.
  
• AMD FirePro, whatever. AMD doesn't do CUDA apps. Will there be nVidia BTO alternatives?
  
• Will these blades they're using be swappable for future upgrades? Obviously they're a proprietary Apple design, but can I pull out the blade that holds the GPU and drop in a new one in two years that has a better GPU? Or are we going for a batpopsnizzle fraking insane "throw your $8000 Mac Pro away every couple years" setup that effectively zero pros are going to go for?

Also, if we're going to go all-Thunderbolt, let's see an all-in-one Thunderbolt chassis with dual disc drives, 4 HDD bays, and at least 2 PCIe slots please.
Peripheral clutter sucks.

Yeah, for a real pro, not just a suped-up iMac, what is currently standing, does not appear to be very useful.

[Janichsan]

Frost, on 10 June 2013 - 10:53 PM, said:

• AMD FirePro, whatever. AMD doesn't do CUDA apps. Will there be nVidia BTO alternatives?

I'm afraid Apple doesn't care about this. They are pushing the cross-platform OpenCL.

[Matt Diamond]

At first I was thinking that as long as they offer an external box for 3-4 hard drives that doesn't look too stupid, I'd be okay. But then I remembered that (last I tried) the Tivo hacking tools didn't see my Tivo drive unless it was mounted internally. Unless that's been fixed, once this thing comes out there will be no way to hack a Tivo drive on Apple's (current) machines.

Obviously that alone wouldn't justify the purchase of one of these beasts, but for that money I expect be able to make it do just about anything i want under Mac, Linux or Windows.

It's a cool-looking device but i question the design ethos. The Mac Pro was the last upgradeable Mac and now they're dropping that ability apparently. Unless maybe they plan to sell a "low-end" Mac Pro that's a traditional tower? (fingers crossed.)

[Diablofett]

It will be of no use to many true "pro" (that means PROFESSIONAL... Apple!) users. Sure, you can add a bunch of external peripherals to get some extra functionality out of the fancy iTrashCan, but can you imagine how messy that will be? I want a tower that I can pack everything into, and I do not care if it is a massive square block. I want the functionality. Leave the "innovative" designs to the average college kiddies and hipsters. It looks like my dream of owning one of Apple's towers will not happen. I will likely build my own. When the time comes and my 2011 MBP 17'' shows its age or gives out, I may leave Apple behind for Winblows after all. I would go for Linux, but the lacking of native software would be a problem for me. I do not want an iMac, the newer Macbook Pros are too small for my taste (I will never go back to a 15'' screen after using my current 17'' MBP!), and now the Mac Pros are no longer suitable for many professional uses. Thanks Apple.

If many others feel like me and leave Apple for Windows at some point, it may make Steve Ballmer do this again...

[the Battle Cat]

Those genius designers could have made the Mac Pro the size of a matchbox if they pulled all the guts out, made them peripherals, and scattered the clutter all over your desk top, floor, and wall shelves.  I wonder if it's possible to build ones own Mac Pro like folks build PCs, that would seem to be the only way out of this fraked up mess.  What a huge disappointment for me.

[Diablofett]

the Battle Cat, on 11 June 2013 - 07:10 AM, said:

Those genius designers could have made the Mac Pro the size of a matchbox if they pulled all the guts out, made them peripherals, and scattered the clutter all over your desk top, floor, and wall shelves.  I wonder if it's possible to build ones own Mac Pro like folks build PCs, that would seem to be the only way out of this fraked up mess.  What a huge disappointment for me.

Actually, there are people whom build their own Mac machines. They are often referred to as "Hackintosh" machines. It takes some modification of the operating system in order for it to accept the machine as an authentic Apple machine, but they do work. If one had the knowledge, I would imagine you could take an old Apple tower shell and place new hardware inside it.

[The Liberator]

the Battle Cat, on 11 June 2013 - 07:10 AM, said:

Those genius designers could have made the Mac Pro the size of a matchbox if they pulled all the guts out, made them peripherals, and scattered the clutter all over your desk top, floor, and wall shelves.  I wonder if it's possible to build ones own Mac Pro like folks build PCs, that would seem to be the only way out of this fraked up mess.  What a huge disappointment for me.

tBC, there is a problem:

I have reached my quota of Beans! for the day, therefore I cannot give you Beans! for this post I am quoting. If you can fix this problem, I shall in exchange give you Beans!

[choiceweb0pen0]

Hmm was hoping it would be a pyramid or even a pentagon. Maybe next time.

[JaguarGod]

Well, I was awaiting word as I watched the keynote live about a new version of the Mac Pro. What would it look like? What would be the ultimate concept behind it's future. I ahd a pretty good idea about where it would go. When Phil stated he was going to give it a grand introduction, I was on the edge of my seat. When I used to do human resource and safety videos for First Energy I needed PowerMacs as they were my computer of choice. I needed all the internal expansion available. Now that I simply develop a racing sim for OSX, I no longer need all that. So after watching the sneak peek, I was very excited. I actually like the design from an engineering standpoint and the form is quite intriguing to me. Again, this is only my opinion. I have used PowerMacs since my 6100 and I will continue to use them. But I am happy (so far) with what I have heard. Granted there is a lot to find out still.

But from a Pro standpoint, I can see how many will have concerns and reservations. I am very interested to see what the price will be for this machine. Also, I do get the r2d2 and trash can replies! It has been a lot of fun to read over the tremendous amount of posts on MacRumors about the new Mac Pro whether they love it or hate it. I will say this though, no matter if you love it or hate it, the sneak peek video is quite cool by itself if you ask me

Hell, I am an Atari Jaguar fan and collector and the system with the CD unit attached looks like a toilet, so a trash can would go pretty well with it

[mindnoise]

my first though the MPro look like a Ashtray-Stand, like the ones ou find at Train Stations or Hotel Lounges.

[the Battle Cat]

The Liberator, on 11 June 2013 - 08:40 AM, said:

tBC, there is a problem:

I have reached my quota of Beans! for the day, therefore I cannot give you Beans! for this post I am quoting. If you can fix this problem, I shall in exchange give you Beans!

Not a problem, I'll simply roll back the time stream to yesterday, but this is very complicated and it will take me about 24 hours to get all the details correct.  So comeback tomorrow and the timeline should be optimal and primed for your bean giving.  No charge.  And thanks!

[Frost]

Janichsan, on 11 June 2013 - 01:44 AM, said:

I'm afraid Apple doesn't care about this. They are pushing the cross-platform OpenCL.

Feh.

I'm just crossing my fingers and hoping they didn't add GK110 support in OSX recently for nothing and embedded Titan or K Quadros will be an option.

I mean I want to like this thing, but no nVidia and no expandability except through insanely expensive, clutter-inducing Thunderbolt peripherals is a really big gut punch for me business-wise.

[ltcommander.data]

Frost, on 10 June 2013 - 10:53 PM, said:

Things that stand out in my mind:

• How much RAM will this have with 4 slots? Apple mentions OSX Mavericks supports 128GB of RAM (finally), but will you be able to do 128GB with those four slots? That may be excessive RAM for most people, but there are engineers who regularly put 64-96GB of RAM to use in current Mac Pros. I've done builds/upgrades for them. Nevermind what film pros do.
  
• How much capacity are these SSDs going to have? You can inexpensively put 16TB in a current Mac Pro, and then boot the thing off a 2TB PCIe SSD. In other words, crazy internal storage. This new setup better offer multi-terabyte at a reasonable price.
  
• AMD FirePro, whatever. AMD doesn't do CUDA apps. Will there be nVidia BTO alternatives?
  
• Will these blades they're using be swappable for future upgrades? Obviously they're a proprietary Apple design, but can I pull out the blade that holds the GPU and drop in a new one in two years that has a better GPU? Or are we going for a batpopsnizzle fraking insane "throw your $8000 Mac Pro away every couple years" setup that effectively zero pros are going to go for?

Also, if we're going to go all-Thunderbolt, let's see an all-in-one Thunderbolt chassis with dual disc drives, 4 HDD bays, and at least 2 PCIe slots please.
Peripheral clutter sucks.

32GB ECC DDR3 DIMMs are available so 128GB of RAM in 4 slots is doable. You might have to drop down to DDR3-1600 or DDR3-1333 instead of DDR3-1866 though.

Anandtech said Apple won't be making their own Thunderbolt 2 expansion chassis, which is disappointing. I can understand coming up with a condensed chassis design incorporating the core components like the CPU, GPU, RAM, and boot storage, but they should have made it stackable so that expansion chassis can be directly added as needed with inset Thunderbolt ports so that no external cables are needed.