Marcus Moore
Forum Replies Created
-
I don’t think it was a hard decision for Apple at all. They waited for Ivey Bridge’s native support of USB3 on the chip. Which is likely why there is no more substantial intermediary MacPro update this year, since the 2012 Xeons still don’t have USB3 or TB on chip either.
I think leaving the machine on the market is their way of saying it’s not going away (which is all Jim Dalrymple every said, which sparked all the WWDC refresh rumours), but the half hearted update says, “Unless you must- wait.”.
In a perfect world, we would see less emphasis on the consumer secrecy around the Pro products. But I’m not sure a company can have two stances on that. FCPX has has the most open roadmap of any Apple product in recent memory. Though I think that window will close as the remaining legacy features are integrated. Once the features are 100% forward-looking again, I don’t think we’ll get any more previews.
-
I tend to find spin entirely devoid of specifics. Cook said 2013. That’s a wide target to shoot for, and gives them ample wiggle room for delays- but it’s a time range nonetheless.
Let’s remember that Apple has been conservative and vague with release dates before. Both 10.0.3 and 10.0.6 were pre announced as “EARLY 2012” and just “2012” respectively. And in both cases people predicted much much more pessimistic launch dates that what Apple actually released. “EARLY 2012” was January 31st, and “2012” ended up being october 23rd.
My estimate on timing of these machine is entirely depends on whether they’re waiting to be able to deliver them alongside Retina Cinema Displays. If they are, then there’s no question that we’re looking at the back half of the year. Apple just isn’t ready to put out a double 2560×1440 display. I’m not even sure what graphics card could drive a 5120×2880 display.
If they’re not, then it could come much earlier in the year. Whenever Intel releases the Xeon with USB and Thunderbold native support.
-
The extraordinarily well-connected (and Canadian) Jim Dalrymple gives his ever-brief take on this:
https://www.loopinsight.com/2012/11/27/about-the-rumor-that-apple-decimated-its-pro-audio-team/
Nope.
There’s no truth to this rumor.
-
I don’t think ANY aspect of the computer business is going to exist in it’s current state for another 10 years. Things are moving much too rapidly.
But until Apple can find an alternate answer to the key benefits of the MacPro: a machine that can use server-class chips for intensive operations, AND multi-lane PCI expandability… I think they’re going to need to keep making a machine in this class.
I’m intensely curious to see what they’ll come up with for the 2013 MacPro replacement. And I don’t have a damn clue what is could be- we might be thinking about it all to much and they’ll maintain the MacPro’s tried and true form factor, but bring it up to spec with the latest Intel Xeon CPUs and I/O. OR maybe it will be something completely different.
But for me the bottom line on this is if everyone thinks the iOS side of the business is SO important to Apple (which it is), then the Mac side of the business is just as important to develop the software for it. If Apple wants the control you say they do, then they need to provide the tools their developers require. And there’s still way to much of a spread between the performance of mobile, desktop, and server class CPUs to think that Apple will hobble those developers.
Apologies if my initial response came off as a bit harsh.
-
That’s ridiculous. Bloomberg is not an untarnished bastion of journalistic integrity, and there’s no evidence that they’re on the shortlist of “PR channels” (Pogue, Mossberg, Gruber, Dalrymple) that Apple uses to get a news message out.
And as to your assertion that Apple will only be making mobile computing devices in a few years is even more crazy. Do you think video/audio pros are the only ones who need powerful desktop machines? What other task uses multi-core processing to burn thru intense calculations? Hmmm… how about, I dunno, iOS development! Xcode development can be very CPU intensive. Are you suggesting that Apple is going to abandon the people developing the applications for it’s oh so important iOS platform? Let them develop on Windows perhaps?
Of course not.
-
If you were Apple, which position would you rather be in? Having the patent, or having the patent used against you?
It’s the system that they have to work within- and under those conditions, its better to be the one wielding the patent than not. Lord knows there’s more ridiculous ones out there that can be read SO broadly that anyone who’s made something that connects to the internet can be sued.
Apple pays too when it has to. One-click purchasing is owned by Amazon.
-
When I starting moving more of my production over to FCPX around 10.0.3, I remember being very impressed at how far I could push the audio before it fell apart. But in the last few months- not so much.
So I agree, something has changed…
-
I haven’t invested in it myself, but anyone who wants a second level of redundancy on backups should really invest in ProVersioner.
-
I’m not doubting what happened to you. But I find it hard to reconcile stories like this. I’ve been using FCPX every day since February on non-inconsequential work, and I’ve never had data suddenly disappear.
In fact, my experience overall has been that on the rare occasions that I do get a crash, everything I’ve done up to the moment of the crash has been retained. Other than restarting not a moment of lost work.
I think it’s important to point this out because if it was entirely indicative of the program itself, then EVERYONE using it would be complaining of stuff like this. And TRUST me, I would be complaining… This has been my busiest year ever, and I credit FCPX with me being able to push more work thru the pipeline than ever before.
So I’m not trying to belittle or belie what happened in your specific case, but I think you need to look at the only two other options: hardware/software configuration, or user error.