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

Mac Pro

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 571 posts

Re: Mac Pro

#471

Post by KaiserPro »

wtallis wrote: post #133
KaiserPro wrote: post #51

Hurrah! GPUs sealed directly into the machine. No more keeping old macs alive with extra GPUs. (the quadro 4000 and k5000 really helped the 2009 macpro) It also appears to only have one CPU. From what the page says its only got one Memory controller, which as the "new"* Xeons have onboard memory controllers. So that seems a bit of a fail. *as in the same Xeons that have been in the HP Z620/820 for the last 8 months

This Mac Pro will be using the Ivy Bridge-based Xeons, not the Sandy Bridge-based ones that are in the HP machines you refer to.

Indeed this appears to be the case.

The only thing appears to be going for this mac is that it has nice disk bandwidth.

The Z series workstation is going to be cheaper, and almost twice as fast+. (assuming one buys the correct fusionio card.) it also has the advantage of taking normal pci slot graphics cards, which can be upgraded later.

+owing to having a second CPU

Re: Mac Pro

#472

Post by Ygg2 »

btown wrote: post #231

Copywriting and product-debate aside, that's some pretty impressive frontend presentation. From what I can tell from the minified JS, they're using Require.JS for code organization, their own jQuery-like utility toolkit they call Apple Core, fully pre-rendered text everywhere, and javascript that plays and pauses two copies of the HTML5 video, one backwards and one forwards, shuffling their opacities for seamless tra…

I haven't seen any video or animation on either FF or Chrome (on Win machine). Any idea what browser does it work in?

Re: Mac Pro

#473

Post by kawsper »

fourstar wrote: post #397
btown wrote: post #231

Copywriting and product-debate aside, that's some pretty impressive frontend presentation. From what I can tell from the minified JS, they're using Require.JS for code organization, their own jQuery-like utility toolkit they call Apple Core, fully pre-rendered text everywhere, and javascript that plays and pauses two copies of the HTML5 video, one backwards and one forwards, shuffling their opacities for seamless tra…

Posting minified JS is pretty useless. Open up Chrome inspector tools and use pretty print to actually read it: http://i.imgur.com/PHUaDSU.png

The point of minified JS is for saving bandwidth, with some added (minor) obfuscation, so I don't know why you would call it useless.

Re: Mac Pro

#474

Post by davidwparker »

kawsper wrote: post #473
fourstar wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Posting minified JS is pretty useless. Open up Chrome inspector tools and use pretty print to actually read it: http://i.imgur.com/PHUaDSU.png

The point of minified JS is for saving bandwidth, with some added (minor) obfuscation, so I don't know why you would call it useless.

He didn't say minified JS was useless, but "posting" minified JS is useless, since we're all going to be looking at the posted code.

Re: Mac Pro

#475

Post by forrestthewoods »

btown wrote: post #231

Copywriting and product-debate aside, that's some pretty impressive frontend presentation. From what I can tell from the minified JS, they're using Require.JS for code organization, their own jQuery-like utility toolkit they call Apple Core, fully pre-rendered text everywhere, and javascript that plays and pauses two copies of the HTML5 video, one backwards and one forwards, shuffling their opacities for seamless tra…

Ugh. I think it's beyond awful. Incredibly slow and in many environments (chrome-windows) effectively non-functional. I still haven't made it to the end because of how slow and unresponsive it is.

Re: Mac Pro

#476

Post by ff10 »

pavlov wrote: post #467
look_lookatme wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I can't see a serious video editor wanting one, but they're all jumping ship to get cheaper Wintel workstations" Is this actually the case? I don't know anything about that segment of the computing industry, but I just assumed that FCP was the industry standard.

FCP was never the only solution in the pro video editing market. Avid has been the traditional choice since the mid-'90s, but FCP was encroaching. Unfortunately the botched introduction of FCP X sent Apple back a decade in this market. FCP X was too different from 7, and it didn't even support many of the workflows that pros needed. Since users had to learn new software anyway, a lot of editors went to Avid or Adobe…

I wonder if any of the damage done with FCP X has been made up for in the last two years since release. What's the word in the studios?

Re: Mac Pro

#477

Post by digitalengineer »

pavlov wrote: post #467
look_lookatme wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I can't see a serious video editor wanting one, but they're all jumping ship to get cheaper Wintel workstations" Is this actually the case? I don't know anything about that segment of the computing industry, but I just assumed that FCP was the industry standard.

FCP was never the only solution in the pro video editing market. Avid has been the traditional choice since the mid-'90s, but FCP was encroaching. Unfortunately the botched introduction of FCP X sent Apple back a decade in this market. FCP X was too different from 7, and it didn't even support many of the workflows that pros needed. Since users had to learn new software anyway, a lot of editors went to Avid or Adobe…

Correct. At least a decade. Combined with the 'all-our-apps-for-50-bucks from Adobe has made a lot of studio's jump ship to Adobe Premiere. I mean what was Apple smoking? FCP wasn't even compatible with FCP.

Re: Mac Pro

#478

Post by [deleted] »

rsync wrote: post #384
snuze wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, I've run OSX as a vmWare guest on Windows. It's possible and it works.

OK, but... - how much initial wizardry is required - how often does it need to be updated, or tended to ... is it like a hackintosh where you need to muck around with it every month or so because something "breaks" ?

[deleted]

Re: Mac Pro

#479

Post by rainforest »

jarek wrote: post #433
Samuel_Michon wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Does this really matter in 2013? Serious question. I could see ECC having been useful in 2000 in the midst of the megahertz race, but I'm not too convinced about today...

The probability of a bit error on normal RAM is quite high [1]. The more RAM you add the more likely you are to see corruption. Not that ECC fixes everything - I still see uncorrected ECC errors on the older HPC nodes on our grid.

[1] : http://lambda-diode.com/opinion/ecc-memory

Re: Mac Pro

#480

Post by tech-no-logical »

btown wrote: post #231

Copywriting and product-debate aside, that's some pretty impressive frontend presentation. From what I can tell from the minified JS, they're using Require.JS for code organization, their own jQuery-like utility toolkit they call Apple Core, fully pre-rendered text everywhere, and javascript that plays and pauses two copies of the HTML5 video, one backwards and one forwards, shuffling their opacities for seamless tra…

pity it does nothing in opera but show the can, and I wore out my mousewheel by scrolling to slide 2 in firefox.

probably just tested in safari. preaching to their own choir I guess.

Post reply on HN