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.

96 of 501 comments (clear)

  1. Will it blend? by dougisfunny · · Score: 4, Funny

    But the question we all want to know the answer to is: will it blend?

    --
    This is not the funny you're looking for.
    1. Re:Will it blend? by tepples · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes. Apple is working with the Blender team to optimize the popular free 3D design package for Mac Pro.

    2. Re: Will it blend? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 5, Funny

      Color me surprised

      Would you like RGB, CMYK, or Lab with that?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re: Will it blend? by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maya and Flame are not as well. So this gives Blender a HUGE advantage over those Multi thousand dollar packages.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:Will it blend? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      You have been able to do that for years. The problem isn't the equipment. It's the skill set of the people involved.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  2. 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?

    1. Re:It's pretty neat by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

      I like my Coolermaster HAF X.

      Since it's the biggest thing in the room, at Christmas, I just hang lights and ornaments on it. Last year, when I came downstairs on Christmas morning, Santa Claus was sitting there, playing Far Cry 3, drunk as a skunk. He wanted me to drive him downtown to cop some coke, but no way am I going to that neighborhood with a fat SOB in a red suit and a big sack of presents.

      I made him some coffee and eggs and put him in a cab. I never knew if he got home OK because there's no cell phone reception at the North Pole. I'll find out tomorrow morning, I guess. If I find him drunk again, I'm gonna send him straight to rehab, because I heard he's getting abusive to the elves again.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  3. Advancing in what direction? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hey guys, have you ever wanted to buy a workstation with half as many sockets and half as many DIMM slots as the prior generation? What if I remove all the capacity for internal expansion cards so that you can enjoy buying external cardcages? Still not sold? I've come up with the least rackable shape in the history of computing, you'll love it!

    1. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

    2. Re:Advancing in what direction? by mlts · · Score: 3, 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.

    3. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

      6 ThunderBolt 2 sockets

      that are working off of up to 3 over all TB channels each one with it's own UP TO pci-e 2.0 X4 link.

      so you thing that repleting a lot of slots with a system that maxes out about 12 pci-e 2.0 lanes is good? But at the max one device can only use X4 pci-e max and at the same time tie up the full channel that it is on.

    4. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Kenja · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Advancing backwards. The new "Mac Pro" is just a "Mac Cube" version 2. I for one will not be buying one, which means my current Mac Pro is the last Macintosh I'll be getting. No internal drive bays, no expansion slots, not a professional computer. I would have to cover my desk with external devices to match what's in my current tower configuration.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    5. Re:Advancing in what direction? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 5, Interesting

      People aren't buying the old one. Apple's customers don't want the size.

      So, Apple's typical customer cares more about aesthetic than usefulness?

      10 years ago that would have been a solid burn (because it wasn't really true); today, when I take into consideration the people I know who tend to buy Apple products*, I'd say it's a far more true statement than ever before.

      * Other than the handful of graphic designers and musicians, myself included.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    6. 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!!!
    7. Re:Advancing in what direction? by lennier1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Rackable? It's a workstation not a server.

      There's actually a third-party rack in the works for these. Think of something like a wine rack, but designed to hold these instead.

    8. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Kenja · · Score: 4, Interesting

      More stuff goes into racks then just servers. Go into any audio studio, the Mac Pro will be in a rack. Same with video editing bays. But I guess Apple isn't interested in those markets anymore. Shame really...

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    9. 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.

    10. Re:Advancing in what direction? by jbolden · · Score: 3, Interesting

      -- So, Apple's typical customer cares more about aesthetic than usefulness?

      I'd say yes and I'm an Apple customer. The iPhone makes huge sacrifices for weight and thin. The rMBP makes huge sacrifices for weight and thin. the iMac. Yes, absolutely. aesthetics are a big part of what Apple sells.

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

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

    12. Re:Advancing in what direction? by jbolden · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The used MacPros were an insanely good deal relative to comparable PC workstations or current iMacs. And frankly not a bad deal relative to PCs. So no, that's not true. They didn't run the latest OSX, but they would run Windows or Linux just fine if you didn't want to be stuck.

    13. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Nerdfest · · Score: 2

      Too bad ... the fact that lots of media people use Apple gear is what got them the billions of dollars of free marketing for the iToys. There's more than a few of them fed up, it seems, and the fawning over Apple seems to have stopped. Many seem quite fed up with the change in direction.

    14. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Chas · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Rackable? It's a workstation not a server.

      Internal expansion is the dirty past. Let it go. It's about as relevant electric drill attachments for sawing and sanding.

      Yeah. Rackable. A lot of these types of machines are used by mobile production crews. With the 2010 MacPro you had to saw the handles off the case to get it to fit some sort of portable form factor (mobile racks). With this one, it's a step in the wrong direction. Sure, the BASE UNIT is quite hand-portable. But you then have to deal with all the peripheral devices that used to be able to mount inside a normal case.

      Previously, you could simply drop your portable rack, pop the ends off, plug in power, a monitor and maybe network and go.
      Now, you have to either hand-carry or unpack multiple devices just to get the same functionality.

      Total memory is the significant metric, not the number of slots it fits into. And that's 12/16 GB vs 6/12GB for the older versions.

      Sockets? The old Mac Pro didn't have any ThunderBolt sockets. This one has 6 ThunderBolt 2 sockets (supporting up to 36 devices).

      It also has 4 USB 3 sockets (vs 5 USB 2 sockets on the old model.) Which presumably is the straw you're clutching.

      Your complaints are without merit.

      I think the term you're looking at is "desktop clutter". Being able to hook up umpty-jillion EXTERNAL devices is not a decent tradeoff for someone trying to get a nice, single-case solution.
      I simply don't understand why Apple has such a hard on for their systems looking like an octopus.

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
    15. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Wovel · · Score: 2

      Well most of the people using the Old Mac Pro were using external storage anyway...

    16. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Wovel · · Score: 3, Informative

      We can assume you don't do any pro video work (In the field or in the studio). In the new one you pull out your case, plug the single thunderbolt cable into the back and call it a day.. Several companies already make portable racks preconfigured with the thunderbolt cable and everything.

    17. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Waccoon · · Score: 2

      One thing that isn't brought up enough when discussing external expansion is external power supplies. So much for compact size.

    18. Re:Advancing in what direction? by ahabswhale · · Score: 2

      It has nothing to do with the iPhone. It has to do with the fact that it's a limited market so it's really not worth their time to make it a priority project.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    19. Re:Advancing in what direction? by AJH16 · · Score: 2, Funny

      But... but... if I needed it, my Mac daddy would tell me and market it to me cause they totally want me to have the best experience ever.

      --
      AJ Henderson
    20. Re: Advancing in what direction? by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

    21. Re:Advancing in what direction? by null+etc. · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oh shoot. I'll definitely not be getting the new Mac Pro then. I was hoping my next computer would justify putting a rack in my living room, right next to the Cray I bought on ebay.

    22. Re:Advancing in what direction? by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      My 2006 core2 duo idled at 160W. Im not sure that its terribly impressive that theyre doing 167 in 2012, or that 44W is that impressive given the power features of most new video cards and Intel CPUs. Basically nothing in a modern SSD-based tower uses any significant electricity when idling.

    23. Re:Advancing in what direction? by amiga3D · · Score: 2

      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.

    24. 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
    25. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      Why are you trying to rackmount them? What person tries to use graphics workstations as servers?

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    26. Re:Advancing in what direction? by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

      No, you have one cable running from the Mac Pro to your rack with storage and monitor (thunderbolt)... the mouse and keyboard are of course wireless.

      The Mac Pro means fewer, or at worst the same number of cables as you had before (because anyone serious was using external storage anyway). Only with a lot less weight and bulk to cart around.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    27. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Informative

      That is talking about the OLD times when you could not get a laptop that could do field editing. Today you would be a fool to try and carry that with you for a field shot that needed editing, every crew I see uses laptops. I have not seen what the Verge article talks about in over 5 years now. You can carry your entire editing suite + storage + backup drives all in a backpack.

      This is 2013 absolutely nobody drags a huge rack of gear on location anymore for field editing.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    28. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      so you have a heater that provides half the power of a desktop, a worthless intel card, a crappy mobile 3d card and a power brick the size of a shoebox for something that really cant be moved off your desk cause it gets a whole hour of battery life

      wow, all that and a 17 inch screen for only 2x the cost of a desktop, you must be proud
      (yes I know what chunk of shit dell your talking about, if you are lucky you did not get last years model which goes down on a bluescreen faster than a drunken whore)

    29. Re:Advancing in what direction? by jcr · · Score: 2

      I miss the Xserves too, but Apple just wasn't selling enough of them to justify the engineering time required to stay in that line of business.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    30. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Holi · · Score: 2

      Show me a Mac that supports Crossfire or SLI.
      2 Video cards does not mean SLI, especially on Macs.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    31. Re:Advancing in what direction? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      Me.

      External 4xSATA drive enclosure, with an eSATA connection. Mac pros have no eSATA port. So I used a PCI-e eSATA adaptor.

      The solution on the new macs would be to use a thunderbolt enclosure. Which works, but is also hugely more expensive. By an order of magnitude.

    32. Re:Advancing in what direction? by phayes · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Apple is making their classic mistake again, but this time they are probably going to overstep too far to be saved.

      You keep on telling yourself that. The general PC market has been shrinking year over year recently, precisely two manufacturers have been resisting the trend: Lenovo & Apple, but your basement analysis will turn that around and bring back the glory days of the beige boxes. Much as with the MBA, Apple is just ahead of the curve and the people too set in their ways to see it are criticizing what they do not understand.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    33. Re:Advancing in what direction? by the_B0fh · · Score: 3, 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!!!!

    34. Re:Advancing in what direction? by the_B0fh · · Score: 2

      I don't get it. The only thing this thing is missing, compared to the old Mac Pro, is expandable internal storage. *ONE* extra thunderbolt wire is going to add that much to the clutter?

      You still needed power, monitor and USB cables with the old Mac Pros, so it's not like those cables weren't used.

      One more extra external drive cable, if you don't use NAS/SAN is going to clutter up your desktop that much?

      Seriously?

    35. 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...

    36. Re:Advancing in what direction? by the_B0fh · · Score: 2
    37. Re:Advancing in what direction? by phayes · · Score: 2

      Expansion slots are more necessary now than 6 years ago? Lol, you're deluded. What exactly (besides storage) did you need a slot for 6 years ago that is not present in the Mac Pro? The only thing I am aware of is video input & that has been announced as an external thunderbolt/usb3 connected box.

      There is no longer the need to have a vacuum cleaner sized device (with the equivalent noise level) for slots that are no longer needed nor wanted.

      Remember this moment. In 6 years look at your computer. It will certainly more closely resemble a Mac Pro with the essential bits (multi core CPU, ram, fast system flash disk, gpu) in the main unit & the rest like storage in other boxes, like NAS/DAS etc. Extension slots are much less necessary today & with thunderbolt & usb3 & successor techs will become even less necessary in the future. Your purported record on ebooks impresses me no more than how many times you may have flipped a coin heads in a row & is no more relevant, above all when I see to making the bad call on how much extension slots are needed.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    38. Re:Advancing in what direction? by MikeMo · · Score: 2

      This guy tried to make one DIY, and failed miserably.

    39. Re:Advancing in what direction? by the_B0fh · · Score: 2

      There are a few things to consider.

      Every year, Apple sells more and more iPhones.
      Everyone else is counting Android activation, which includes those TV sticks, tablets that don't do anything, and so on.
      Smartphones include high end smartphones, mid end smart phones, and low ends, which are just used as feature phones.

      Feature phones are not worth crap to the user (in terms of smartphone features - obviously they function OK as a *CELL PHONE*), or the manufacturer. Only cell phone companies like them.

      You could make a case for the mid tier cell phones as part of the smartphone market.

      So, until you break it down that way, lumping everything together presents a distorted picture.

    40. Re:Advancing in what direction? by ducomputergeek · · Score: 3, 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.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    41. Re:Advancing in what direction? by jbolden · · Score: 2

      Well then:

      We know people didn't want the old one. The old one had lots of utility but:
      a) The price was high
      b) The case was ugly

      OTOH in the used market you could get some fantastic deals. Which indicates that either:
      i) The case was ugly was the big problem
      ii) They just didn't need the power at all. There simply is no high end workstation market anymore. A good quality desktop is good enough for almost everyone.

      I don't see any other alternative. What Apple is offering is a unit with terrific aesthetics and high utility relative to apple desktop at about $1000 more. So it offers people a clean choice do they want more utility or not without encumbering them with making an aesthetic sacrifice. If they don't buy the MacPro then we know that ultimately there just isn't a meaningfully sized workstation market and these things need to be made by small OEMs catering to niches. If it does sell then yes aesthetics were the problem.

      The original poster was upset about losing some utility for aesthetics where he is defining utility in terms of expansion slots. Given things like thunderbolt chaining I have a hard time seeing why they matter much. And if they did matter then why can I still get such a great deal on a MacPro on eBay?

    42. Re:Advancing in what direction? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      Hard to find a laptop with that kind of punch.

      The base model, quad-core Mac Pro starts at $3,000.

      If you can't "find a laptop with that kind of punch" for 3 grand or less, you're not looking very hard.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    43. Re:Advancing in what direction? by Dahamma · · Score: 2

      Yeah, and don't discount the fact that many who use high end workstations are designers, video editors, and/or just basic web developers (with no real need for them anyway!) working at companies with just plain too much money to spend. And as far as aesthetics - go into a well-funded startup office these days, and it's absurd where that VC money is really going...

      I have a maxed out nearly new Macbook Pro for work that I use for development (has Win7, Win8 and Fedora 18 on it, etc). When the company decided all email and corp network services had to be accessed from a locked-down managed machine, they wanted to reinstall and remove admin rights for it. But since they couldn't support Parallels, etc (or a lot of other tools developers were using) they just gave everyone a shiny new maxed out Macbook Pro JUST FOR EMAIL. So I now have a $3000 email terminal.

  4. 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 jedidiah · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are confusing tools for professionals with overpriced doo-dads intended to fool other people into believing that you are wealthy.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    2. Re: Video editing... by tysonedwards · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've just specced out a Dell, and the Dell is $1016 more expensive. Add to that, the Mac Pro only consumes 450w versus the Dell's 1500w, which in turn will save $1040/year in power. While the others will probably come down in price in a few weeks to months, at this moment Apple does have the edge on price. Now, when you compare to build-it-yourself, you are absolutely correct that Apple is more expensive, but so is everyone else too.

      --
      Thirty four characters live here.
    3. Re: Video editing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Equivalent video cards alone cost $1400 or so, so you most definitely cannot build an equivalent pc or half the price. Perhaps you could wind up cheaper, but not nearly by as much as you suggest.

    4. Re: Video editing... by hawguy · · Score: 5, Informative

      I've just specced out a Dell, and the Dell is $1016 more expensive. Add to that, the Mac Pro only consumes 450w versus the Dell's 1500w, which in turn will save $1040/year in power.

      While the others will probably come down in price in a few weeks to months, at this moment Apple does have the edge on price.

      Now, when you compare to build-it-yourself, you are absolutely correct that Apple is more expensive, but so is everyone else too.

      I can believe the pricing (though I had a hard time finding a Dell with equivalent specs - can you post the configuration here?), but I'm having a hard time believing that a Dell with equivalent hardware specs to the Mac Pro uses 3 times more power, since the underlying hardware is, well, equivalent.

    5. Re: Video editing... by djdanlib · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you want to talk about power supplies... You are confusing the maximum available spec with the normal power draw of the system. I have an 800W power supply in my reasonably overpowered Wintel gaming box. It draws ~160W during normal use, up to 300W while gaming. Most people will be fine with a 450W power supply unless they add a whole bunch of extra hardware, especially hard drives. The other benefit you usually see with a higher-wattage power supply is that it's typically built with better power filtering and more efficient components, so you would save money with a more efficient power supply even though it is rated for higher maximum available power. It's not totally intuitive. The more you know!

    6. Re: Video editing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Dell consumes 1500W, or it has a 1500W power supply? Those are not the same thing.

    7. Re:Video editing... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      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.

      My experience tells me otherwise: Regardless of how much I tinkered with it, Neither XP or 7 could deliver acceptable latency with either the Rocksmith 1/4" TS cable, nor my Korg K49.

      the 2008 model Macbook I was given, however, syncs both up perfectly; albeit not at the same time, but I'm pretty convinced that's either a software issue (Garageband seems to play better with multiple USB input devices than Logic), or just good ol' fashioned user incompetence.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    8. 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.

    9. 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.
    10. Re: Video editing... by thestuckmud · · Score: 2

      FWIW, the Mac Pro (base model) is said to consume 40W at idle. It is also very quiet.

    11. 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.
    12. Re:Video editing... by riskkeyesq · · Score: 2

      Your post indicates that you are not a video professional, so you can run along, this product is not designed for you. The right tools for many video production houses are FCP and this product. And please, shill, do post your "recent benchmarks" that show "Windows does a little better".

    13. Re: Video editing... by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      THe claims about Mac's supposedly superior power consumption are hillarious. Ive seen like 3 or 4 people post here about how awesome the new Mac Pro's 44W power usage metric are.

      NEWS FLASH: All Haswell-based platforms are going to have incredible power consumption:
      http://www.anandtech.com/show/7003/the-haswell-review-intel-core-i74770k-i54560k-tested/2

    14. Re:Video editing... by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      " You can get a Windows machine with the same hardware specs for half the price "

      no you cant. Show me a build of the mac pro with Two of the equivalent video cards for HALF PRICE. Because if you do you will make a lot of people really happy.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    15. Re: Video editing... by the_B0fh · · Score: 4, Funny

      I just submitted a link earlier today - the Appleinsider guys spec'ed out a build it yourself computer with the same specs as the high end $10k Mac Pro and it ended up costing them $14,300. That, and your $1k/year in power savings, is quite a bit of TCO savings, for someone who can use that kind of a system.

      http://slashdot.org/submission/3217733/high-end-mac-pro-is-40-cheaper-than-what-you-can-build-it-for

    16. Re: Video editing... by ApplePy · · Score: 2

      No.

      Sorry, but no. Harbor Freight shit is nowhere near SnapOn.

      You obviously do not use tools to make your living, or you wouldn't utter such nonsense.

      Unless you're being facetious... maybe? :)

      --
      That I'm right, and you don't like it, doesn't mean I'm a troll.
  5. Not a great value, in my opinion by WilliamGeorge · · Score: 4, Informative

    - Only a single CPU, despite using the more expensive line of dual-CPU capable Xeon E5 processors (so you are paying for the added circuitry to handle dual procs without the corresponding benefit).

    - Dual video cards, despite this not being a gaming system. Granted, some media editing applications can utilize multiple GPUs for computing - like Adobe Premiere Pro CC - but many cannot, and even ones that can don't necessarily get a doubling of performance from the second card.

    - Only room inside for a single drive, so any serious storage has to be external (adding wires and cluttering up things, rather than saving space like this small form factor seems to be designed for).

    - 64GB of RAM maximum, despite the CPU's ability to handle more.

    - Upgrades overpriced... and this is coming from someone who works at a custom system builder, and we sometimes get dinged by folks for charging more than Newegg. Obviously things like labor, support, warranty, etc have to be factored into the parts costs, but Apple charges more than any other company I've seen for that 'value add' (this is not new news, though - just a continuation of what they have always done).

    I've already had customers of mine asking for price and performance comparisons, and the good news? We always come out on top! I love PCs :)

    --
    William George
    1. Re:Not a great value, in my opinion by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Informative

      Only a single CPU, despite using the more expensive line of dual-CPU capable Xeon E5 processors (so you are paying for the added circuitry to handle dual procs without the corresponding benefit).

      This is a bit of a bummer, but I think they nonetheless went with the Xeons over the desktop-class Intel processors because of the support for ECC RAM.

    2. Re:Not a great value, in my opinion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      They could have gone with the cheaper Xeons. Not all the Xeons are dual-socket.

    3. Re:Not a great value, in my opinion by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Despite my lack of interest in Apple products and video editing, I actually did read the fucking article.

      Adobe Premier doesn't use the second video card. It barely uses the first one. It pegs the CPU.

      Apparently Final Cut X (whatever that is) is the only video editing software that features optimizations that make use of all this hardware. It's apparently wicked fast, but people hate Final Cut X. Apparently, Final Cut 7 was great, but X blows, despite running like a champ on this system.

      My head did almost asplode when I saw the price tag, though. I guess the barebones model isn't that overpriced at $3k, but the configurations they mention weighing in around $10k sound like hilariously bad deals.

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    4. 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?
    5. Re:Not a great value, in my opinion by bussdriver · · Score: 3, 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.)

  6. Sheer ridiculous stupidity... by Assmasher · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...coming from someone with a 2012 Mac Pro dual hex core.

    I know it's been said before, but for God's sake people - paying Apple's RIDICULOUS prices for SSD, RAM, processors, is just insane.

    I like OSX, and Apple's laptops are sometimes the best choice, but as a desktop or dev box? Last choice by a wide margin. I only had to buy one for very specific (unhappy about it) reason and hopefully will never need to buy one again.

    Just an example of the obscene pricing from Apple, 24GB of RAM from Apple was going to cost me almost $2000 at the time. TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS. I bought better RAM, ending up with 26GB, with better performance and all the same trimmings (ECC et cetera), and it cost me $400.

    I wonder if their SSDs are made out of solid gold as well... Oh, and good luck with upgrading your graphics card in a year.

    --
    Loading...
    1. Re:Sheer ridiculous stupidity... by LDAPMAN · · Score: 4, Informative

      Try again... Go price a PCI connected SSD that can do 1200MB/sec. There are several available from Intel, FusionIO, and others. You will find that they are more expensive than what apple is offering. A 1TB Intel is around $3500

    2. Re:Sheer ridiculous stupidity... by LDAPMAN · · Score: 2

      Actually, it's worse than I thought. An 800GB intel is $4575.
        http://www.serversdirect.com/components/drives?PageSize=10&CurrentPage=1&f=d009c317-95b0-4676-9937-fbe4692b623f+bde97a67-549f-4493-aa82-c2512f98619c|6e112ca4-0f29-4068-82df-54be3f465864+6cf1a74d-d93b-4765-b5cb-9e4e2c2c8cf6|9b473e27-c1d5-42f3-b1ea-553fd08ee8e5+559396bd-4999-4f6f-8f25-c1bc348fd49f|060c2fbe-a817-491e-a78f-e50acef28521+8451ff7a-4982-445a-8ad7-ad4f609de97b|

    3. Re:Sheer ridiculous stupidity... by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

  7. I wish Apple would stop wasting time... by maroberts · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...and produce a new 17"+ MacBook Pro with Retina display quality

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

    1. Re:I wish Apple would stop wasting time... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      Quite possibly the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Do 17" laptops still exist?

      Yup, my wife has a 17" Dell from maybe 2-3 years ago.

      I find the full keyboard w/ 10-key awful damn handy.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  8. 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
  9. $1040/year in power? by iceperson · · Score: 4, Funny

    Are you generating power by throwing money into a furnace to fuel a steam engine?

  10. Mac Pro icon for OS X by recoiledsnake · · Score: 3, Informative

    How can I replace my OS X trashcan icon with a small Mac Pro?

      http://jonathanhirz.com/macprotrash-icon/

    --
    This space for rent.
  11. GPU cards for OpenCL by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Dual video cards, despite this not being a gaming system. Granted, some media editing applications can utilize multiple GPUs for computing - like Adobe Premiere Pro CC - but many cannot

    On the other hand if there are a lot of professional systems that have a ton of power available to those that program in OpenCL, might not we see a new class of accelerated applications?

    If nothing else it will probably get Blender to support OpenCL.

    Apple has historically tried to promote a more advanced standard to make possible applications that are not written yet, but can be with new technologies.

    And while currently not everything uses OpenCL, now there is powerful motivation to do so. But Photoshop, Aperture and Final Cut all make use of this hardware so there's lots of people that will benefit.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  12. Re:Expensive Garbage Can ? by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    If you know about hard drive failure rates, the new design is an even better idea - putting large hard drives in external cases where it's easier to swap them out.

    The internal storage is all very fast SSD, and doesn't really have the same level of failure rate as a spinning disk.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  13. Re:$3k by Wovel · · Score: 4, Insightful

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

  14. Re:3.5GHz quad core for $3000? Way overpriced. by Wovel · · Score: 2

    No you couldn't have. Why did you feel the need to lie on /. What a reason to throw away your personal integrity. Go ahead and link your parts list. Make sure to only use new parts and not used CPUs and RAM like so many like to link.

  15. Re:3.5GHz quad core for $3000? Way overpriced. by Holi · · Score: 5, Informative

    You can get two D700's for $225? Please tell me where. the closest card I can find to that is a W9000 and the best price for 1 I have seen is $1300.

    --
    Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
  16. 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.

  17. Re:3.5GHz quad core for $3000? Way overpriced. by Fear+the+Clam · · Score: 2

    I'm writing this on a 3.2GHz 4-core Intel i5-4570 CPU, with an Nvidia GeForce GT 640. Running Linux.

    Phew. For a second there I thought you were gonna talk about how long it's taking you to copy that 17-MB file.

  18. Re:legs by Lumpy · · Score: 2

    Are you really that uninformed about it? The thing is silent compared to anything else out there with even 1/2 it's processing and video power.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  19. Smaller is more useful by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    So, Apple's typical customer cares more about aesthetic than usefulness?

    Smaller in just about any area of computing, IS more useful.

    I had a Mac Pro at one point, and the only thing I ever really put into the case was more hard drives. But external cases are really better for that anyway because they are easier to get to, as long as you don't lose any speed accessing external storage - which you do not with thunderbolt (or heck even with USB 3.0 if you are talking spinning media).

    The new Mac Pro is more useful to the people that still need workstations and cannot be served by consumer PC's.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  20. You really can't understand the desire for small? by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    So, you really think a netbook is inherently more useful than, say, a 16" Alienware powerhouse?

    That is a bad comparison because it misses the point of WHEN smaller is better. Smaller is better if you have enough (or more) compute power in the smaller item to do the same job as the larger one.

    I had a Mac Pro myself; it was a beast. It was hard to move around if I needed to, and harder to get to hard drives to add or replace. For what most people do with workstations these days, smaller is more useful - because we are often re-configuring (or moving) workspaces, we are working in smaller areas. Or we are working at home (as people do these days much more often) and may need to change areas we work in.

    I also just recently went from a 17" laptop to a 15" laptop. The larger screen was nice but the new one has the same resolution, and is more powerful and also has improved battery life and much, much faster internal storage and external ports. So that is in fact far better. Smaller means it's easier to carry in more bags and also lighter.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  21. Re:legs by Penguinisto · · Score: 3

    It's obvious that you are grossly ignorant about Macs.

    If the reviews are fully accurate (no reason to believe otherwise), the only thing quieter than the new Mac Pro would be the original Mac Cube (which had no cooling fans at all, so you only heard something if you held your ear reaally close to it...)

    Hell, even my old dual 2004-era G5 PowerMac (with, no shit, NINE Fans!) was quieter than most PC-style desktops. You only heard it if you really shoved the CPU cycles (e.g. rendering a highly complex 1080p-sized Bryce scene in a very hot room at full-rez w/ all options cranked to '11' would do it), or if you opened both outer and inner cases while it was running.

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  22. Totally False by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    Apple's mantra is to make one really easy way to do things they think people want to do and at first, that does draw people in, but as they start to get comfortable and try to push the boundaries, they realize they can't.

    That is 100% wrong, and a complete misunderstanding of what Apple does - even in fact why Apple products are popular.

    Apple optimizes for the easy case, yes. But to make something REALLY easy requires a ton of complexity underneath, which they expose to those interested or technically inclined.

    Even iOS, the supposedly closed system, Apple does nothing to stop jailbreaking - they even hire jailbreakers. They now that having a contingent of highly technical users that want to work without boundaries is a good thing, so Apple does nothing to stop them - and unlike many other companies Apple stuff is written in such a way that it's easy for technical people to make great use of it once you are "inside the system" as it were.

    Who got tens of millions of advanced UNIX systems in people's homes? It wasn't Linux. It was Apple.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  23. Also that pricing is misleading by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Informative

    Apple fans love to demand an "equal for equal" spec for comparisons, but that's silly. Party of the reason Macs often cost so much is you have to get a ton of shit you don't need. Ya, dual video cards cost a lot. Guess what? Next to nobody needs them. If you don't, they are wasted money. In a Dell, you just don't order one. With Apple? You get what you get and fuck you otherwise.

    So they often lose out on pricing bigtime when you compare actual task needs. Like let's say I need a system with a fast CPU and reasonable bit of RAM. I want to run some Cadence (ok you can't do that on a Mac, but whatever). A fast quad core and 32-64GB of RAM. The Mac Pro is good there. However video needs are minimal, integrated graphics is fine, as is a $50 GPU. Oh, well there I'm screwed. While the dual GPUs won't hurt, they won't buy me anything either. So I'm paying for them and can't make use of them.

    That is a problem, if money matters at least. You want to spend it on the useful things, and save it on the shit you don't need.