Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mac Pro gets half-assed “update”

marco.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 321 posts

Re: Mac Pro gets half-assed “update”

#191

Post by shriphani »

astrodust wrote: post #171
cageface wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The crowning irony is that it looks like the digital creative set is going to be pushed into the arms of Microsoft, for so long the subject of their scorn. If you want a fast digital workstation now Windows is your only reasonable option.

Discounting home-made computers, which the big names are not interested in competing with, where you can you source a workstation that's more powerful than the 12-core Mac Pro? The Dell T7600 with 2x2.2GHz 6-core Xeon chips and only 8GB of memory and a 500GB drive comes out at $4,300. The Mac Pro with 2x2.4GHz 6-core, 12GB and a 1TB drive is only $3,800. Unless I'm missing something, the Mac Pro is still a better dea…

ibuypower or one of the other custom rig manufacturers. or buy bare-bones kits on tigerdirect and put it together.

Re: Mac Pro gets half-assed “update”

#192

Post by reaganing »

astrodust wrote: post #171
cageface wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The crowning irony is that it looks like the digital creative set is going to be pushed into the arms of Microsoft, for so long the subject of their scorn. If you want a fast digital workstation now Windows is your only reasonable option.

Discounting home-made computers, which the big names are not interested in competing with, where you can you source a workstation that's more powerful than the 12-core Mac Pro? The Dell T7600 with 2x2.2GHz 6-core Xeon chips and only 8GB of memory and a 500GB drive comes out at $4,300. The Mac Pro with 2x2.4GHz 6-core, 12GB and a 1TB drive is only $3,800. Unless I'm missing something, the Mac Pro is still a better dea…

Except that Dell is now using the newer Sandy Bridge E5 Xeon processors while Apple's using models over 2 years old.

One simply can't compare what Apple's now offering with other workstations.

Re: Mac Pro gets half-assed “update”

#193

Post by brunorsini »

sneak wrote: post #119
brunorsini wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't count on that, because I actually had to update my macbook air just to get the Almighty Thunderbolt Display to work. In fact, my previous MBA (2010 generation, display port)didn't even power the thing up (it's powered exclusively over thunderbolt).

I don't think that's accurate. The thunderbolt displays include a power supply with a magsafe power OUTPUT for charging a mac laptop plugged in to the thunderbolt cable, so it logically follows that they must have their own AC input.

You are right, the monitor does have AC input. Still, it won't even power up unless it's connected to a Thunderbolt port. Believe me, I've learned this the hard way.

Re: Mac Pro gets half-assed “update”

#194

Post by aphyr »

jsz0 wrote: post #177
aphyr wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scientific computing, system modeling, numerics, CAD/CAM, visualization, developing highly concurrent software, event processors, rendering, machine learning (esp vision/video/spatial stuff), genetic algorithms, databases, GIS, crypto, traffic processing, theorem proving, compiling stuff, exploratory data mining. Gaming, maybe. I routinely saturate my MBP's 4 HT cores. It's also nice to develop on the same architectu…

Good reasons but I wonder is the current/new generation 12-core Mac Pro inadequate for this? It could be better but it still seems to serve its purpose.

Depends on what you're doing. I'd be satisfied with a 12-core Mac Pro for everyday development--but if a 128-core Xeon were available I'd take it gladly.

When I was working on quantum state diffusion, it took many hours on a 24-node cluster for a single run. In many of these tasks, the problem will expand to consume all reasonably available resources; more cores allow greater precision, wider sampling of parameters, higher fidelity, etc.

Re: Mac Pro gets half-assed “update”

#195

Post by there »

scarmig wrote: post #165

Only tangentially related, but what's the consensus on which "ultrabooks" look best to compete with MBP/MBA? I was hoping that Apple would make my choice for me, but I'm underwhelmed. I'm personally surprised that the Lenovo X1 Carbon hasn't gotten more notice: 14 inch screen, 1600x900, made of carbon fiber, beautiful body, less than 3 lbs, embedded 3G connectivity. Question marks seem to be battery (I've heard numbe…

The new ASUS Zenbook Prime (UX21A 11"/UX31A 13") models that were announced last month have similar specs to the new MBA (Ivy Bridge, up to 256Gb SSD, etc.) but are both available with 1920x1080 IPS screens. I had the original UX21 and sold it because the keyboard was not so great, but from the reviews of the new models, they have improved the keyboard and trackpad.

Re: Mac Pro gets half-assed “update”

#196

Post by bombtrack »

bane wrote: post #188
bronxbomber92 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want non-Apple hardware, go buy it. There's nothing stopping you (or anyone else) from doing so. I think Apple fills an obviously valuable niche (several niches, really) and I don't see any incentive for them to open up like you suggest. A lot of us do like to pay for design, reliability, and the end-to-end experience, and I'm glad there is a company like Apple to provide for customers like myself.

"If you want non-Apple hardware, go buy it. There's nothing stopping you (or anyone else) from doing so. " Unless I want to use non-Apple hardware with Apple software.

I just built a fairly powerful desktop hackintosh and I'm running OSX 10.7.3. The little bit of research that went into ensuring all the parts were compatible was well worth the cash savings.

Re: Mac Pro gets half-assed “update”

#197

Post by bane »

astrodust wrote: post #171
cageface wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The crowning irony is that it looks like the digital creative set is going to be pushed into the arms of Microsoft, for so long the subject of their scorn. If you want a fast digital workstation now Windows is your only reasonable option.

Discounting home-made computers, which the big names are not interested in competing with, where you can you source a workstation that's more powerful than the 12-core Mac Pro? The Dell T7600 with 2x2.2GHz 6-core Xeon chips and only 8GB of memory and a 500GB drive comes out at $4,300. The Mac Pro with 2x2.4GHz 6-core, 12GB and a 1TB drive is only $3,800. Unless I'm missing something, the Mac Pro is still a better dea…

It's a good point. A quick look on Newegg lets me know I could probably build a much better machine for around $3k even. But systems builders charge much much more for worse hardware.

Sidequestion: people still buy hard drives as small as 500GB? 3tb runs around $170.

Re: Mac Pro gets half-assed “update”

#198

Post by brunorsini »

huggyface wrote: post #152
brunorsini wrote: post #70

If you're into home recording (who isn't, these days?), this is a huge blow. When your Pro Tools/Cubase/Logic project has 40+ tracks of high resolution audio files and several high quality real-time plugins processing each one of them you really need a lot of CPU power. I purchased a Thunderbolt display just a couple of months ago. I wanted to use it with my Macbook Air while waiting for the Mac Pro to be updated, fe…

Cubase VST was doing 32 track audio flawlessly on Windows back in the late 90s on an original Pentium. Seriously weird seeing people demanding more power for audio work.

That's like saying people were multitasking just fine on Windows 3.11, so why would anyone want a modern OS? If you want to work at a professional level and produce music that actually sounds good you need to work with high resolution audio files and complex, CPU-intensive plugins.

Unless, of course, you own extremely expensive hardware or happen to be a lo-fi genius like Bob Pollard or Calvin Johnson :)

Re: Mac Pro gets half-assed “update”

#199

Post by kamaal »

robomartin wrote: post #168
alaskamiller wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The irony of this post is so hilarious to me, this is Apple coming full circle from its clone wars days. Man, those were some shitty experiences. Apple is an hardware company. They make money off the nuts and bolts pieced together with premium markup, software is but icing on top. They practically give away the results of their development costs on OSX. You're encountering the cognitive dissonance as experienced in t…

The problem with the early attempt Apple made at inviting the clone market is that they didn't give it time to evolve. The first wave or two of IBM clones were a mess. A disaster. Compatibility problems galore. People who buy crap don't continue to buy it and they sure as hell don't recommend it. The crap PC clones died a quick death. It didn't take long for the market to evolve and "grow up". Companies like Compaq s…

Apple isn't successful because of Macbooks, Mac minis or iMacs.

Bulk of Apple's success is from their iDevices and its surrounding ecosystem. iPod, iPod touch, iPhone and iTunes app/music sharing infrastructure.

So in many ways Apple isn't a computer company anymore. Its more like Sony nowadays. What you will see in the future might be computers dying a slow death in the Apple ecosystem. Expect things like TV, Stereo and other entertainment stuff like Gaming consoles gaining more traction.

Slowly but steadily Apple is transforming itself into a consumer electronics company like Samsung.

Re: Mac Pro gets half-assed “update”

#200

Post by damoncali »

robomartin wrote: post #98

This illustrates the issue I highlighted in another thread: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4097141 The fact that Apple keeps hardware and, increasingly, software, so tightly controlled leads to a situation like that of this "new" Mac Pro. If the Apple hardware ecosystem were open like that of Windows you'd have major companies all over the world evolving the platform in wonderful ways. Performance would go up an…

Why would apple want to let some else use their software to undercut them on hardware? It makes no sense. Apple's margins a huge for a reason.
Post reply on HN