[Eugene]

Originally Posted by Jason Clearly that's not the case and I wonder I ought to just get the Retina MacBook Pro (fully specced up). The MBA has been okay at driving the screen but sometimes chugs along. My question is: would the New Retina MBP have a better chance at driving the graphics. I'm not a gamer but I do like watching hi-def movies usually in mkv format.

The MBP Retina should be capable of driving both its built-in display and your 30" at the same time without issue...at least for 2D. For 3D you are definitely going to limited by the GT 650M's total memory, memory bandwidth and fillrate.

[Matsu]

Well, Cook says new machines later in 2012, which is not bad news. How good or bad might depend on whether he means "later, in 2012" or in "late 2012". I need a desktop machine, I need it with USB3. Apple doesn't have one of these.

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by Matsu Well, Cook says new machines later in 2012, which is not bad news. How good or bad might depend on whether he means "later, in 2012" or in "late 2012". I need a desktop machine, I need it with USB3. Apple doesn't have one of these.

All the components of an updated Mac Pro are available now, so I'm left wondering if the missing piece is a large Retina display. The biggest issue is Apple not taking advantage of new processors/chipsets as soon as they are available. If new Mac Pros come in October 2012, then that doesn't bode well for a quick update to Haswell "Xeons" in early 2013...

[Matsu]

Sorry, massive typo from me. It's like my brain said 2013, but my fingers refused to believe it. Early 2013 is probably the best case.

[torifile]

"later next year" means late 2013, right?

[Dave]

Originally Posted by torifile "later next year" means late 2013, right?

Dunno about late, but it clearly means 2013, yes. I'm really hoping Mr. Cook had a brain fart and meant to say this year. It likely won't affect me personally, but IMHO Apple's current Mac Pro is embarrassing even at their new prices.

[alcimedes]

Eugene, not sure if this still applies:

1. I think Apple has an official recycling program now, where they actually give you store credit for old machines.

2. Last time I was in there to get a machine repaired, it was an Air that had never had a warranty, but like 5 components had failed over time.

They replaced all of them for under $200, and that included the logic board. The Genius bar guy said something to the effect that if the parts don't fail due to abuse (water, dropping etc.) that they cap the amount you have to pay for the repairs, and it was a very reasonable amount.

Might be worth asking to find out if that's still the case.

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by alcimedes Eugene, not sure if this still applies: 1. I think Apple has an official recycling program now, where they actually give you store credit for old machines. 2. Last time I was in there to get a machine repaired, it was an Air that had never had a warranty, but like 5 components had failed over time. They replaced all of them for under $200, and that included the logic board. The Genius bar guy said something to the effect that if the parts don't fail due to abuse (water, dropping etc.) that they cap the amount you have to pay for the repairs, and it was a very reasonable amount. Might be worth asking to find out if that's still the case.

1. I'd rather find a way to repair it cheaply than have the screen ground up into silicon/metal shards and recycled. Apple assures us that 'recycling' doesn't mean a landfill in Africa or Asia, but who knows exactly what happens to them...

2. I went to the Apple Store. They originally billed me $80 including labor for a new PSU. The Genius discovered scorch marks on the MLC, so the cost of a full MLC replacement would have been over $700. I know an Apple Store 'specialist' however who assures me there is some sort of loophole in California that forces them to repair out of warranty Macs for free after a certain amount of time has passed.

[Moogs]

Originally Posted by Eugene Moogs, why not assemble your own "Mac Pro" from parts? It's easier than Lego...

Don't you have to hack the firmware and whatnot to get it to work with PC parts (the ole EFI stuff, etc)?

Or are there now sites dedicated to listing known OSX compatible parts? I'd give it a shot as long as I can use brand name parts from Intel, etc. Do you just go and buy everything from Tiger Direct or similar? I have zero scripting, programming or soldering / EE type knowledge so anything that requires any one of those things, disqualifies me.

[Chinney]

As I posted some years ago, Apple fixed our out-of-warranty iMac G5 for free (new logic board). I am not sure if they always do that, but others here have posted similar stories. That computer is still doing daily service 4 years after its repair, and 7 years after its original purchase. That service, mind you, is not in our own house, but that of a family friend. We have a 2011 iMac purchased last September that we are pleased with, albeit we are far from being pro users.

[torifile]

Originally Posted by Moogs Don't you have to hack the firmware and whatnot to get it to work with PC parts (the ole EFI stuff, etc)? Or are there now sites dedicated to listing known OSX compatible parts? I'd give it a shot as long as I can use brand name parts from Intel, etc. Do you just go and buy everything from Tiger Direct or similar? I have zero scripting, programming or soldering / EE type knowledge so anything that requires any one of those things, disqualifies me.

There are many sites that have lists of compatible off the shelf parts. For example: http://tonymacx86.com/ and http://tonymacx86.blogspot.com/search/label/CustoMac in particular.

It's not rocket science to put one together but keeping it running gets to be more and more of a chore. As I said, my Core i7 hack was still running fine with 10.6.8 but I could not getting upgraded to Lion despite my best efforts. Eventually, I gave in and bought a refurb iMac.

[Moogs]

Originally Posted by torifile There are many sites that have lists of compatible off the shelf parts. For example: http://tonymacx86.com/ and http://tonymacx86.blogspot.com/search/label/CustoMac in particular. It's not rocket science to put one together but keeping it running gets to be more and more of a chore. As I said, my Core i7 hack was still running fine with 10.6.8 but I could not getting upgraded to Lion despite my best efforts. Eventually, I gave in and bought a refurb iMac.

Just found some Hackintosh guides and wikis ... it seems like the number of OTS, high-end Intel boards and CPUs we can use is very limited. I didn't see a single Xeon board for example. So it looks like even custom built Hackintoshes have parts more in line with iMacs (Core i5 etc) than with Mac Pros. Although I did see some good video cards that have been made to work apparently.

But I don't like the idea of setting a baseline system (let's say 10.7.2), and then having the possibility that every new OS update breaks my machine. Also Adobe and others won't provide a lick of support for any type of custom built machine so basically by doing this you guarantee no software developer will spend time trying to help you if something doesn't work, because you're on a non-standard configuration. At least that would be my worry.

[alcimedes]

See, I could see going that route once 10.7 reaches the final point update. I'm pretty happy with 10.6.8, and would be pretty tempted to toss together a working tower and then put 10.6 on it, knowing that Apple is unlikely to release any further updates that would nuke the system.

Running 10.7 though would be a nightmare, as each point release has the ability to take your machine down.

[pscates2.0]

Originally Posted by Moogs Just found some Hackintosh guides and wikis ... it seems like the number of OTS, high-end Intel boards and CPUs we can use is very limited. I didn't see a single Xeon board for example. So it looks like even custom built Hackintoshes have parts more in line with iMacs (Core i5 etc) than with Mac Pros. Although I did see some good video cards that have been made to work apparently. But I don't like the idea of setting a baseline system (let's say 10.7.2), and then having the possibility that every new OS update breaks my machine. Also Adobe and others won't provide a lick of support for any type of custom built machine so basically by doing this you guarantee no software developer will spend time trying to help you if something doesn't work, because you're on a non-standard configuration. At least that would be my worry.

As well it should. I don't see the appeal in this trade-off...a bit more choice or power/specs, sure...but the prospect of constantly fiddling and chasing gremlins looms over you. That has to take its toll over time! It's telling that several of the more savvy, in-the-know 'Novans have gone this route and many say it's quite the headache and not worth it in the end.

And you bring up a good point...it's not just the hardware and the Mac side of it. You run into problems with software and the involved companies and their support. You're kinda on an island by yourself, in many ways. You really have to know, and accept, that going in.

No thanks. That's not why I use this stuff. If I wanted to chase my tail and constantly dick around with my computer every time I had to update or install something, I'd just cut to the chase and go buy a Windows-based system to begin with.

I know there are users who genuinely enjoy that sort of thing, and the challenge and discovery of "rolling your own". More power to you. But just realize you are in the minority, and that you're a masochistic weirdo.

But I salute your daring, curious nature. Better you than me.

Originally Posted by alcimedes See, I could see going that route once 10.7 reaches the final point update. I'm pretty happy with 10.6.8, and would be pretty tempted to toss together a working tower and then put 10.6 on it, knowing that Apple is unlikely to release any further updates that would nuke the system. Running 10.7 though would be a nightmare, as each point release has the ability to take your machine down.

Exactly. Who needs that level of grief, hassle and frustration, on purpose? Maybe on a spare machine, sure. But there's no way I'd base my day-to-day usage or work on it. I wouldn't feel comfortable. I've heard and read too many horror stories. I've recently orchestrated my life to where I can sit in my house and work in Illustrator 6-10 hours a day, for decent money/exposure and more creative freedom than I've ever had before. I couldn't louse that up by cobbling together a Frankenstein rig and "hoping for the best", day in and day out. It's all I can do just to keep filenames, revisions, deadlines, uploads/emails, invoicing, etc. all together...I can't imagine adding ongoing tech support/troubleshooting/gremlin chasing to the mix.

There's value in the amount of horseshit you get to sidestep and avoid by "playing it safe", even if every little spec or feature isn't quite to your liking.

I don't skydive or bungee-jump either, if that tells you anything.

[Moogs]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 But I salute your daring, curious nature. Better you than me.

Don't salute me just yet. I am far from making that choice, but it can't hurt to investigate. So far I haven't seen much that suggests the Hackintosh route is anything but a headache. If I am willing to accept headaches I might as well switch to Windows and deal with the kind of headaches that are at least supported by the companies themselves.

[GSpotter]

Originally Posted by nikstar101 "Our pro customers are really important to us...don't worry as we're working on something really great for later next year." So maybe they have something up their sleeves. Although to be honest this could be a hold response until they kill it with a new iMac??

I thought/hoped that they had learned by the Final Cut X intro... By 2013, most remaining pros probably have switched...

[Moogs]

Just read that in their shame, Apple took the "new" sticker off the Mac Pros on teh store. Thanks for being so up front about it, Apple. Next time just mention "we updated the processors" so you don't have to dupe people with the "new" logo on a product that is 0% new tech.

Oh yah, there won't be a next time. All right... next time you're about to EOL a long-standing product with an "insult bump".

[pscates2.0]

Originally Posted by Moogs Don't salute me just yet. I am far from making that choice, but it can't hurt to investigate. So far I haven't seen much that suggests the Hackintosh route is anything but a headache. If I am willing to accept headaches I might as well switch to Windows and deal with the kind of headaches that are at least supported by the companies themselves.

Exactly. That's kinda what I was thinking. At least then you have some lifelines to grab onto if needed. Unless you're just a full-on super geek or tech/computer savant from the top down, rolling your own - especially if it's your primary, day-to-day rig you actually use for real work or income - is a gutsy, serious move. I know I couldn't do it...I'm not savvy, or patient, enough. I have to go with legit, boxed offerings with a 1-800 number attached.

[Mugge]

Originally Posted by Moogs Just read that in their shame, Apple took the "new" sticker off the Mac Pros on teh store. Thanks for being so up front about it, Apple. Next time just mention "we updated the processors" so you don't have to dupe people with the "new" logo on a product that is 0% new tech. Oh yah, there won't be a next time. All right... next time you're about to EOL a long-standing product with an "insult bump".

You are right they did!

That is both funny and sad at the same time.

[nikstar101]

Originally Posted by Moogs Just read that in their shame, Apple took the "new" sticker off the Mac Pros on teh store. Thanks for being so up front about it, Apple. Next time just mention "we updated the processors" so you don't have to dupe people with the "new" logo on a product that is 0% new tech. Oh yah, there won't be a next time. All right... next time you're about to EOL a long-standing product with an "insult bump".

Even Apple realised that they were taking the piss with the "New" sticker.

Update: Macrumors have another story about an Apple Exec confirming to Forbes that the Mac Pro and the iMac will indeed get an update in 2013.

http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/...oming-in-2013/

Interestingly is describes it as a new design. So maybe a new case is in the works too.

[Moogs]

Macworld confirming yesterday's "customer letter" from The Tim.

http://www.macworld.com/article/1167..._for_2013.html

So... the Pro line ain't dead yet but sounds like it might be dead in its current form. Which is fine. I'm all for positive change as long as they don't kill the internal expandability and power over other top of the line Macs. Make me a new cheese grater Apple... I dare ya.

One thing I wonder about: might they possibly be designing their own GPUs? They certainly have the resources and expertise given the iPad processors, etc. And that could certainly explain a delay as it would take a year or so to design it and get the fab ready. Probably far fetched but that would be something I'd look at (if I ran the company). They could outsource the fab to Intel... but it would be fantastic to get out from under the pal of AMD and Nvidia's BS offerings and refusal to update drivers.

Everything is going to be OpenCL software-wise (Adobe and others are starting to support it now), so it could be done.

[pscates2.0]

The letter from Tim Cook to a customer asking about the Mac Pro.

Franz, Thanks for your email. Our Pro customers like you are really important to us. Although we didn’t have a chance to talk about a new Mac Pro at today’s event, don’t worry as we’re working on something really great for later next year. We also updated the current model today. We’ve been continuing to update Final Cut Pro X with revolutionary pro features like industry leading multi-cam support and we just updated Aperture with incredible new image adjustment features. We also announced a MacBook Pro with a Retina Display that is a great solution for many pros. Tim

Talk about painting themselves into a corner. After a two-year wait, and then yesterday's underwhelming "update"...if this "later next year" release doesn't shine your shoes and make you breakfast, people are going to lose it.

Are there technical reasons of any kind that yesterday's update wasn't more substantial?

Why on earth wouldn't their pro desktop get the latest, most powerful processors and graphics, and things like Thunderbolt (which have been on all the other Macs for a year now) and USB 3.0? Just so it doesn't look completely neglected and ignored? It still has Bluetooth 2.1 (as does the iMac). All the notebooks and the Mac mini have Bluetooth 4.0.

I'm not being a spec whore and I would imagine even the lowest-rung Mac Pro runs rings around anything I've ever owned or used. But you can't deny that it's just weird that such an expensive, long-neglected machine got such a mediocre update yesterday. Which is why I'm asking...is there a technical reason (the chips or processors not meant for these boards or blah, blah, etc.)?

Are they really in the midst of a true, ground-up redesign of the Mac Pro and didn't think it was necessary to give the current one any more attention or updates than what it got?



All I know is that they've just about tapped their goodwill amongst some, so if people go on Cook's word and wait another long chunk of time, thinking they've been promised something truly "wait-worthy" - and it's not...holy hell. It'll be ugly. You think people were bummed and underwhelmed yesterday...



The only thing I can imagine is that Apple, after nine years (the G5/Mac Pro body/design was unveiled at WWDC 2003, remember...hasn't changed much since) is truly working on "redefining the professional desktop as we know it" (ha...that'll probably be one of their taglines) and everyone's truly in for a treat.

For you tower guys, is there something lacking, or definitely needing improvement, in the current design? In your "next generation Mac Pro" wet dream, what should this new model (that you're now having to wait another 6-12 months for) be like? What would it have, what would it do? What ports? What processors, expansion, graphics?

I don't know, I'm asking...I don't play in this end of the pool so I'm 109% clueless about what makes a Mac Pro rock or suck.

Enlighten me so I'll know.

[nikstar101]

I just had one quick thought with all this talk of a Mac Pro next year. Firstly that is very un-Apple like to give people a road map of their computers (both Mac Pro and iMac). Secondly if this is official then sales of those items are going to tank until new models are released.

Seems very odd!!

[pscates2.0]

Yeah, I don't get the "next year" thing either, unless, as with the Airs and the new MacBook Pro, Apple has decided to go all SSD, Retina Display, etc. While the Mac Pro doesn't have a display, I figure they might use the opportunity to release a new companion display to go with it, based on the Retina Display and with updated ports (USB 3.0).

If that's the case, if they're in some sort of self-imposed holding pattern until the component availability and cost is where they need it to be, that might very well account for yesterday's update (and it may be the reason the iMac gets one more modest go-around soon in its current form...Ivy Bridge stuff and updated graphics, USB 3.0, etc...the same sort of solid, but non-earth-shattering upgrades the 13" and 15" MacBook Pros got yesterday?

The money Apple is charging for SSDs, they can't very well sell a $1,199 iMac with a 256GB SSD (they're charging $400 for them in the online store). Maybe they're working on a huge acquisition plan and they're going to be able to get their hands on them later this year or next at a cost that means the next entry-level iMac won't start at $1,799 (because people will be even less happy about that than "underwhelming updates", I promise you).

That could be it, because there's no way in hell, with everything being what it is right now, today, that Apple is going to sell an iMac for $1,199 with a 128-256GB SSD and a 21.5" Retina Display (3840x2160) and maintain those healthy margins we always hear about.

When you view it from this perspective it all kinda makes a bit more sense...Apple will squeeze one more round out of the current iMac design and give it the same stuff the 13" and 15" got yesterday (that shouldn't involve a huge undertaking, right?), perhaps later this summer, and then a true redesign in 2013, along with the Mac Pro?

It's been confirmed that both Tim Cook and a rep from Apple have said this in the past 30 hours, so the above has to have some truth to it.

I suppose they could put out a "next generation" iMac alongside the current models, as they've done with the MacBook Pro, but I'm betting those larger displays are the holdup. And they probably realize nobody is going to fork over $3,000+ for an iMac, no matter how sexy it is.

[Moogs]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Talk about painting themselves into a corner. After a two-year wait, and then yesterday's underwhelming "update"...if this "later next year" release doesn't shine your shoes and make you breakfast, people are going to lose it. Are there technical reasons of any kind that yesterday's update wasn't more substantial?

There are some rumblings that there are no Intel-made motherboards that support both the latest Xeon chips AND Thunderbolt, as well as some other new tech standards which apparently are close at hand. So, IF they've been working on something (we know they have their own fabrication shop where they mock up designs and try them out) then the short answer could be there is nothing currently offered that was good enough to warrant them stopping what they were doing, putting some redesign mojo into the old Mac Pro, and then resuming.

Even this though bugs me on one level because Apple has huge resources now but they seemingly still insist on very small engineering and development teams. I suppose this is a quality control philosophy but this is exactly the kind of situation that would justify a Mac Pro engineering team, whose job it is to update the existing chassis once every 12 months (like clockwork) with the best of whatever is available.

Originally Posted by nikstar101 I just had one quick thought with all this talk of a Mac Pro next year. Firstly that is very un-Apple like to give people a road map of their computers (both Mac Pro and iMac). Secondly if this is official then sales of those items are going to tank until new models are released. Seems very odd!!

Makes no difference. Sales were already slow and what they released yesterday was a guarantee of further slow sales to no sales. They just plugged something slightly better in there so they didn't have to spend an ounce of time on it and communicated it all wrong up front (obviously). Maybe this is their plan all along... get users in an uproar / get everyone talking, then 24 hours later plant the seed for the next 15 months worth of rumors and build up.

I'll tell you one thing: if they come close to a home run product they will sell a shitload of them. If they drop the ball or balk using sales as an excuse, virtually everyone currently with a Mac Pro will vacate the premises. In any case a 12-15 month wait (next WWDC seems as reasonable a time as any but I don't know Intel's roadmap for next year) will lose some customers regardless but they could end up losing all of us pretty much. They're betting the ranch at this point.

For my part I'll reluctantly stick around knowing this info because waiting (based on official Apple press statements) appeals to me more than a Hackintosh or the Lenovo tower I priced out today (which was pretty sweet and under $5000). I've waited 5 years to upgrade once prior (ironically I think that was the G4 to G5 transition but I'm not positive). I can do it again.

[pscates2.0]

Cook doesn't strike me as a bullcrapper, or someone to just say something for effect or hype (he doesn't strike me as a shallow braggart, or someone given to ego-stroking "big statements"...that's just my gut feeling on the guy). He has to know that he's going to be held to this, and for him to go out of way to say that he must believe whatever they're working on is worth the wait and that "all will be forgiven" when it arrives.

In fact, his words could've very well led to direct purchase decisions made (or broken), so he's aware of what's at stake and if they release some half-assed thing next year (after nearly three years of no real movement or advancement in the product), he knows he'll get an earful. It'll be him taking the majority of the heat because everyone will refer back to his statement from today.

So I have to believe he's not stupid and he wouldn't set himself up like that.

Yeah, I figured there had to be some sort of technical reason at play...they wouldn't do what they did yesterday just to be mean, or jerks about it.

Although it might've helped them a bit if they'd clarify it a bit just so it doesn't totally look like they don't give a shit.

[Moogs]

I should add Paul that there were zero technical barriers to at least updating the GPUs (which are now close to 3 year old tech), so there's no excuses there. But maybe they tried and would not get cooperation, which leads me back to wondering about an Apple-designed GPU in the works. 100% speculation on my part but that's the one piece that makes the least sense from all of this.

Even if everything else happened in exactly the same way, updating the GPUs should not have been a problem for them and it would've been a sign of listening and good will towards customers. So chalk that up as a major f- up or as a sign of bad relations with their vendors... which would not surprise me at all. GPU vendors have historically treated Apple (and us) like crap. No getting around that. I thought when Apple went all standards-crazy a few years ago that it would help the GPU situation but it didn't.

[pscates2.0]

The people who are most upset, then...are they unaware of these technical barriers? If so, what did/do they expect? If not, does learning about them help?

In areas - graphics, etc. - where there should be no barrier, I'd love to know why Apple went this way.

As with the new Final Cut X, maybe they're looking to do something so new, radical and "ground up" that they'll take the hit on this knowing it'll all even out down the road and that people will understand once they see the new stuff?

Although that's probably not a good analogy as there are still people crapping their pants over Final Cut X, huh?

[Moogs]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 The people who are most upset, then...are they unaware of these technical barriers? If so, what did/do they expect? If not, does learning about them help? In areas - graphics, etc. - where there should be no barrier, I'd love to know why Apple went this way.

Who the hell knows to the second part. Speculating on it will only piss me off more because whatever the reason is it isn't good enough / wasn't planned carefully enough (to be avoided).

To the first part, those are just guesses by angry customers. There is no definitive information I'm aware of that shows Apple had no options in the motherboard department (for example to use one that had USB 3 but not Thunderbolt). But nor do I discount those theories out of hand. The reality is I don't follow Intel's roadmaps and releases closely enough to know what is available now, what was available 3 months ago (for a ramp up), etc. But I do think it's implausible that there is NO board Intel has which offers better connectivity options than what we have now. Surely there has to be at least one or two USB 3 compatible board, etc.

It's merely one possible explanation among many (unsatisfactory) explanations, of why machines that are two years old, were not given at least a substantive "bump" yesterday. The Mac Pro / G5 / G4 line has had its share of mediocre bumps. I think what pissed us off yesterday was that this didn't even qualify as "mediocre". It was closer to half-assed / sneaky / et al.

[Chinney]

I wonder if Apple is indeed considering something radically different on the pro front. Apple is a company that cares about design and that is willing to throw existing design ideas under the bus. Maybe they are considering that for the tower design.

Looking at standard towers, the whole concept seems so, well, 1999, or earlier. Is there a different and smarter way to combine pro components, maybe making them even more easily replaceable and making the power/capabilities more easily scalable, while still respecting the overall design elegance that Apple is known for? I don't know, but maybe there is.

As pissed off as some are in this thread, and for good reason, it is fun to speculate about the possibilities.