-
John Siracusa perspective on Mac Pro Successor
-
[Chris Kenny] “(The ‘K’ series processors are targeted at overclockers and aren’t generally offered by mainstream OEMs. And in any event the 3770K has a base clock only 3% higher, an irrelevant difference.)”
If there was a definitive statement that Apple is not in the speed game, it would be the above.
Yes, the 6 core is without TBolt, it is why they don’t have a 6core iMac (or 6 core i7 “tower” for that matter).
There is also a different class of i7 procs that aren’t offered by Apple, in the i7 “Extreme” desktops that go beyond the K series.
Again, this is evidence that Apple doesn’t release technology just to release it, for better or worse.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “If there was a definitive statement that Apple is not in the speed game, it would be the above.”
It’s not nearly that clear cut. Apple is in fact offering the fastest processors they can offer without sacrificing significant functionality. This suggests that Apple does care about processor performance… they just don’t care exclusively about processor performance.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Chris Kenny] “It’s not nearly that clear cut. Apple is in fact offering the fastest processors they can offer without sacrificing significant functionality. This suggests that Apple does care about processor performance… they just don’t care exclusively about processor performance.”
There is a difference between a fast car, and the fastest car.
Moore’s law determines that by simple logic, the new class of CPU is faster than the old CPU.
This is the distinction I am trying to make, crappy car analogies aside.
Apple does not care about the fastest. They do care about overall performance of modern technology, which happens through the inertia of technology development, but offering the fastest at all times isn’t the goal.
-
[Walter Soyka] “I don’t know what it will be, but I’d assume it will offer some serious power in order to differentiate from the rest of the line. If it doesn’t, what’s the point?”
It will have power due to it being a brand new CPU.
If Apple wanted to offer the latest intel power plant, they could, but they must not see a point to that release.
Yet, they obviously see a point in keeping that channel open.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “[Walter Soyka] “I don’t know what it will be, but I’d assume it will offer some serious power in order to differentiate from the rest of the line. If it doesn’t, what’s the point?”
It will have power due to it being a brand new CPU.
If Apple wanted to offer the latest intel power plant, they could, but they must not see a point to that release.
Yet, they obviously see a point in keeping that channel open.
“I know I’m in the minority here, but I still believe that Apple gave up on the Mac Pro, but then was shamed–mostly by developers–into promising something new. I DO believe we will now get one because of last year’s developers conference, and that it will be pretty good because they will live up to their promise, but I don’t think they actually give two poops about it. If they did, they would have been upgrading it all along.
Something that isn’t discussed here much–if at all–is the idea that, in addition to mobility, Apple is committed to lower power consumption, and in the light of global warming, monster trucks like the Mac Pro just don’t fit into what they want to be producing. I, personally, would still like to have a monster truck, but hey, maybe they are saving me from myself. I certainly don’t believe that this is the primary reason for them potentially ditching the Mac Pro, but I do think it feeds into it.
-
[Chris Harlan] “I know I’m in the minority here, but I still believe that Apple gave up on the Mac Pro, but then was shamed–mostly by developers–into promising something new.”
Apple has no issue with dumping products.
An extremely modest MacPro refresh was made available at WWDC, not afterwards.
They didn’t drop MacPro sales and then reinstate it.
I understand there are healthy reasons for perpetual cynicism around here and that Apple left a lot of video prifessionals hanging, but shamed in to making a new MacPro? I don’t see it. If anything, they would have offered an parachute strategy like they did with the XServe and closed the doors.
Since the decision was made to keep the older tech on the shelf, it seems to me that someone at Apple has a plan.
What Apple was shamed in to doing was removing the blue “new” tag off of the MacPro on the Apple Store a day or two after WWDC.
As far as energy efficiency, I whole heartedly agree with you. I mentioned gas guzzlers a few times in this thread. Also, working with fcpx, it is amazing to me how much organization can get done in an incredibly economized use of space. It allows doing more with less despite what Gallagher argues. I hope the timeline receives a few more economies.
-
This thread has brought out the best of the heavyweight boxers and we have seen a hundred solid punches delivered that resonant. As a bantamweight I might only get in one quick blow and since there are no glass jaws in this thread, I know my brains will be scrambled a moment after my effort lands…
Apple went with IBM when they believed and were likely promised that the PowerPC chips would be the fastest because they were the smartest instruction set and architecture in town. IBM still makes PowerPC trucks but Apple abandoned PPC (shortly after I bought into all the sizzle of the G5) because IBM let them down, couldn’t keep up with the Intel team that seemed to put new rubber on their wheels after every lap in the race. So Apple partners with Intel and benefits for just a few years on the fast track raceways, with an eventual lynchpin becoming the head start that Thunderbolt gave them for once again going with the fastest and smartest technology they co-developed. But that’s also proven to be where their honeymoon began to unravel with USB3 nipping at their heels and becoming as prevalent as snowflakes in the spring in the US; and then 10Gbps Ethernet appears to steal some of their Thunder again without being as smart or as good but sounding like it is important.
And where is the promise of 100Gbps Thunderbolt to scorch all competition? Delayed because there is no need for it now? Delayed until 2014 can have a way of never happening as something else is in the works. Like IBM, Intel will offer it but will it be in time to outsmart Apple’s competition? It seems doubtful since Intel wants to serve two masters: PC and Mac. When Apple felt left out of the party by IBM in 2005, they found another party and had some fun. Will that happen again, “later in 2013?” Or will they be satisfied with a head start having the first Xeon Thundefbolt CPUs? But maybe they understand the party is getting old and they are seeking something different, perhaps this year but maybe not found for another year. Just as they went with Intel and their first generation alliance was a very short dance with the earliest Core Duo, it may be that what Apple dances this year may only be a hint of what they plan to do as they look about the dance floor for another partner.
Of course CPUs and GPUs are so important to get the work done, but integrated and faster Thunderbolt is an extremely important set of moves to bring on. I don’t know if Apple has the rights to do Thunderbolt and/or Thunderbolt 2 without Intel, but if they do have the rights, they may make their move once again. Their rational is not about feature overkill and specs per se, but integration of what works best together again.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
[Craig Seeman] “The funny thing about it is that they might actually be right or many more of us would be buying HP Z series workstations.”
My suspicion is that this has more to do with people disliking Windows (deservedly or not) or preferring FCP/FCPX for their workflows than it has to do with the Thunderbolt ecosystem — especially since everyone still clinging to their old Mac Pros, waiting for an update, is by definition not in the Thunderbolt ecosystem.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Jeremy Garchow] “It will have power due to it being a brand new CPU. “
I’m not looking for a workstation with a year’s worth of Moore’s Law improvements over an iMac.
I want a computer that can take me to the moon. I know I’m a little different than most folks here. I’m a designer before I’m an editor. My renders are measured in minutes per frame, not frames per second. Six cores will not make me as happy as sixteen. What is the point of a Mac Pro successor that’s only incrementally superior to an iMac when the potential for so much more is readily available?
[Jeremy Garchow] “If Apple wanted to offer the latest intel power plant, they could, but they must not see a point to that release. Yet, they obviously see a point in keeping that channel open.”
This is a very neat summation of my whole frustration and bewilderment with Apple.
Apple has a whole lineup of really, really nice machines in their categories — except for their workstation, and it’s been this way for two years now.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
I believe people here firmly overestimate the importance and success of TB. Even within the Mac world its adoption rate isn’t exploding, on the PC side it is virtually non-existant. There are just a handful of TB mobos with the older 1155 socket on the market while there are zero for Intel’s most recent socket 2011 and x79 chipset with apparently no plans or attempts by the mobo manufacturers to implement it. For the average consumer, USB3 is more than enough and substantially cheaper. For the enterprise and server market PCIe is and will be the way to go. Leaves the video crowd, on the mac side, with certain mac models.
It’s a niche connector within a niche within a niche – just like FW800. I doubt that’ll change, and I doubt Intel sees that much different in the long-run.——
“You also agree that you will not use these products for… the development, design, manufacture or production of nuclear, missiles, or chemical or biological weapons.”
iTunes End User Licence Agreement
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up