Mac Pro • Hacker News Board

Re: Mac Pro

#361

Post by kunai » Tue, Jun 11, 2013, 1:37 AM UTC

glenra wrote: post #70

"Okay, we COULD just label the ports with regular high color contrast paint. Say, white paint on a black background or black paint on a white background. But that would be TOO EASY and the panel would then really 'pop' against our otherwise monolithic clean design. Which would be distracting." "But during actual use the ports are going to be on the BACK of the device (so you won't see it) and will have random stuff p…

Do you really twist your neck around on your laptop to make sure that the labels for plugging in peripherals all the time?

I thought not.

Re: Mac Pro

#362

Post by kunai » Tue, Jun 11, 2013, 1:41 AM UTC

bilbo0s wrote: post #239

mbell wrote: post #208

Personally I couldn't care less about the design, it would be sitting behind several large screens anyway and the thermal ideas sound interesting.... That said.... 4 ram slots???? Really? 12 cores, 2 GPUs and I get 32GB of ram? Maybe 64GB if 16GB dimms in standard sizes become a thing? That kills it completely in my book.

That paucity of slots is what got me to thinking... I was wondering if the idea would be to daisy chain these together via TB 2 and see one workstation with... say ...36 cores or whatever. I'm trying to determine if that would be a possibility. In essence, is the Mac Pro a Thunderbolt 2 "processing" device? Or could it be made to be one? If it were... Man... put me down for a couple of them. I mean you could potentia…

Since they run on different boards, technically you'd set up two or three nodes and run them in a parallel supercomputing setup.

Would be expensive as hell, I'd reckon.

Re: Mac Pro

#363

Post by Samuel_Michon » Tue, Jun 11, 2013, 1:41 AM UTC

vacri wrote: post #200

notatoad wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

considering the labels are totally unnecessary, i don't see the problem. it's not like people are going to be plugging USB cables into the thunderbolt ports or the power cable into the HDMI port by accident.

A USB jack can fit into an RJ45. Still, there is something of a problem in that sometimes people plug things in while the power is off, and computers are often kept tucked away in dim corners. Looking at the machine from an angle, it's not always obvious which connectors are where, especially if you're not a techy who could name ports in their sleep.

That sounds like a plea for LED illuminated ports... like the Mac Pro will have.

Re: Mac Pro

#364

Post by Samuel_Michon » Tue, Jun 11, 2013, 1:45 AM UTC

makomk wrote: post #287

bjustin wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This offers almost no advantage over a late model iMac with a Thunderbolt-to-PCIe breakout module (which is what many power users have been doing in the years since the last update). A few big advantages over the iMac: Xeons processors, so more cores & more cache; ECC RAM; and (two) workstation graphics cards. Six thunderbolt ports means up to 36 (!) PCIe peripherals by daisy chaining, which means a lot more expanda…

I suspect that a lot of people bought the Mac Pro despite the fact that it has Xeon processors, rather than because of it. They're a lot more expensive without a huge performance benefit for desktop or workstation applications. The main advantages of Xeon were dual-socket support and support for oodles of RAM slots, and the new Mac Pro supports neither of these things.

I think you’re omitting the Xeon’s increased stability versus consumer grade architectures. Many Mac Pros are used to run non-stop, they need to be more dependable than other computers.

Re: Mac Pro

#365

Post by matthew-wegner » Tue, Jun 11, 2013, 1:46 AM UTC

rsync wrote: post #256

I love this new device. I suspect I will buy one. But it doesn't solve my "need a new mac pro" problem. Right now my 2009 octo mac pro, with six displays attached, plays three roles: - it is my high end desktop workstation, with three primary high resolution (2560x1600) displays. - it is my HTPC, with one of the six monitors strung into another room entirely. - it is my office NAS, with four internal 3TB disks So, th…

Maybe build a Hackintosh? I've been running one for 18 months (coming off a Mac Pro when it became clear upgrades would be a long time coming). It's pretty great. If you're careful with hardware selection you can apply Apple's own software updates with zero issues.

See: http://www.tonymacx86.com/351-building-customac-buyer-s-guid...

Re: Mac Pro

#366

Post by alexvr » Tue, Jun 11, 2013, 1:48 AM UTC

duncan_bayne wrote: post #335

It's disturbing to see so many people drooling over this hardware. Granted, it's tasty-looking, but: - http://www.defectivebydesign.org/apple - http://www.ifixit.com/blog/2011/01/20/apples-diabolical-plan... - http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2337939,00.asp Give some thought to the above before buying an Apple device, please.

It's a brilliant design (far beyond its aesthetic novelty), and quite frankly I could care less that they lock things up or spy on me. Make sure to copy and paste your little comment on every Windows PC/phone/tablet announcement as well. Last I checked, it's easier to install Linux on a Mac than a new PC. Oh, you didn't know? Apple isn't the only "diabolical" company. Don't forget about Google, Microsoft, Facebook, the government, etc.

Actually, you know, you're right. We need to boycott these evil organizations. Who needs technology when the companies who make it are greedy? Who needs a government when it does stupid things every once in a while?

Re: Mac Pro

#367

Post by aylons » Tue, Jun 11, 2013, 1:52 AM UTC

ChuckMcM wrote: post #144

As a design asthetic I find it fairly interesting. By working toward a design managing the thermals in a way that allow for more heat removal while allowing it to not sound like a 747 on takeoff is good. I suspect your typical desktop machine will benefit from that kind of thinking. Also for a long time Intel was trying to push all of the expansion boards outside the case with USB, and Apple seems close to achieving…

Thunderbolt is actually a few PCIe 3 lanes (4 in the original incarnation) and a display port in a cable. This way, an external peripheral is not inferior to most on board alternatives in terms of throughput, and has not room for interesting things add size is no longer a constraint.

I am developing my first PCIe project and must say I am still shocked on how powerful and underutilized the bus is. Hope Thunderbolt solves this - peripherals could be much powerful than today, from SSDs and USB sticks to high bandwidth data acquisition tools.

Re: Mac Pro

#368

Post by mkmkmmmmm » Tue, Jun 11, 2013, 1:58 AM UTC

rsync wrote: post #272

dman wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you could buy a HP Z820 with liquid cooling, dual xeon processor, a fusion io card, three workstation gpus, and 12 sata drives :)

Thanks for that tip. I might just do that. Perhaps reload my mac pro with snow leopard one last time, get another year or so out of it, and then "switch" to linux on an old school workstation like this. Hate to abandon all of my mac VMs, though. I don't think a non-mac vmware host can run mac VM guests... without a lot of mucking around, that is...

another Mac user that thinks Lion is a useless POS? Do yourself a favor a get a liberated computer next time (and the cheapest Mac desktop if you just have to develop for iOS or OS X). That's what I'm going to do when I have to upgrade.

Re: Mac Pro

#369

Post by Steko » Tue, Jun 11, 2013, 2:00 AM UTC

duncan_bayne wrote: post #335

It's disturbing to see so many people drooling over this hardware. Granted, it's tasty-looking, but: - http://www.defectivebydesign.org/apple - http://www.ifixit.com/blog/2011/01/20/apples-diabolical-plan... - http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2337939,00.asp Give some thought to the above before buying an Apple device, please.

tldr:

First link is bonkers.

Second link is oh no, pentalobe screws.

Third link is gasp non-removable battery. Yep just like practically every knock of-- excuse me ultrabook has (and for exactly the same reasons Apple did it the first time: people like the very thin form factor).

Re: Mac Pro

#370

Post by Samuel_Michon » Tue, Jun 11, 2013, 2:02 AM UTC

ttcbj wrote: post #238

gamache wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see it that way at all. The Mac Pro has always been about the top 1% power users. The appeal was twofold: it was a bitchin'-fast machine you could stuff with as many cards and drives as you want, and it ran OS X. This new design removes the former selling point. 12 core max (same as current)?? Four RAM slots (down from eight)?? 1/6th the volume (i.e. space to plug stuff in)?? This offers almost no advantage o…

I mostly agree with this. I have owned three mac pros. I use them for development work. I like them because they are fast, well-built, run OS X (which I like), I can put lots of RAM in them, and put a few extra hard drives in with software RAID. There isn't much about this announcement that excites me. I don't think I need two graphics cards (though maybe 4K will be nicer than I realize). I don't need it to be smalle…

Video editor and high end graphics guy checking in. I’m very excited, mostly by the size of the new Mac Pro. I’ll be able to take this workstation anywhere and just plug it into some rented displays. Lugging the current Mac Pro around means I’ll have to go there by car or settle for taking a MacBook Pro along and doing rendering on a rented Mac Pro. The new Mac Pro, I can bring along in a carry-on and have plenty of room to spare for other equipment. Too bad it won’t be available for months, I have so many projects for which this would be a dream.