Slashdot Mirror


A Flood of Fawning Reviews For Apple's Latest

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.

14 of 501 comments (clear)

  1. It's pretty neat by Anonymous Coward · · 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?

  2. Video editing... by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

    1. Re: Video editing... by ttucker · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Price out buying a computer from dell, and then adding a commodity video card (remember only Apple stops you from doing this).

      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.

    2. Re: Video editing... by HerculesMO · · 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.

      --
      The price is always right if someone else is paying.
    3. Re:Video editing... by StripedCow · · Score: 4, 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.

      --
      If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
  3. MacWorld weren't that positive by fatphil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He was quite explicit - if he had the money, he'd rather spend it on something else.

    Looks gimmicky, seems massively over-priced. I'm sure there's a market for it...

    --
    Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
  4. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Chas · · 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.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  5. Re:Advancing in what direction? by ttucker · · Score: 4, 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.

  6. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Customers telling Apple what they want is not Apple's business model.

  7. Re:$3k by Wovel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You need to look a lot closer at the specs...

  8. The video cards are really dumb by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, 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.

  9. Re:Not a great value, in my opinion by Overzeetop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know, if you don't put your computer in a miniature trashcan, you can install a more efficient cooling system.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  10. Re:Advancing in what direction? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, 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?

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  11. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Dahamma · · Score: 4, 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...