“It is fitting that Apple has held back the introduction of the next Intel-based desktop Mac — which some have dubbed the “Mac Pro.” For it is the desktop platform that poses so many challenges for Apple and the industry as a whole,” John Martellaro writes for The Mac Observer. “We all know that mobile computing is taking off and that fewer and fewer professional customers see a compelling reason for having a large, clunky tower on their desk (or even below it) unless they have a very special need… The most typical use of these “Pro” desktops is when the user needs all the computational power and memory she can get on her desktop plus Mac OS X; forget the heat load. Now, Apple’s primary professional markets include design and publishing, film and video, photography and graphics, music and audio, as well as bioscience and research. That sounds big, but when summed up, these professional markets constitute a very small percentage of Apple’s sales. So the burning question is, given the popularity of the iMac for consumer sales (and some penetration now into Pro markets!) the trend towards mobile computing, the diminished need for internal expansion, what role should a new Apple Pro desktop play?”
Martellaro asks, “How about making the new Apple Pro desktop the Apple Media Center as well?”
Full article here.
Advertisements:
• Introducing the super-fast, blogging, podcasting, do-everything-out-of-the-box MacBook. Starting at just $1099
• Get the new iMac with Intel Core Duo for as low as $31 A MONTH with Free shipping!
• Get the MacBook Pro with Intel Core Duo for as low as $47 A MONTH with Free Shipping!
• Apple’s new Mac mini. Intel Core, up to 4 times faster. Starting at just $599. Free shipping.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
tHE duDE:
Don’t sugar coat your opinions, be direct and unambiguous.
maczealot: thank you for stating the obvious.
we use them in our lab for computational work… basically using as much power as we can get. I’d frankly like to see as many high-performance cpus and cores as they can stuff into a box that’ll fit on my desk. 4 minimum, 8 preferred (i hear intel has a quad-core unit coming along). huge cache and support for 8-16 gigs of RAM is basically necessary. if it isn’t >4x as fast as my current dual G5, i’ll be cranky.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”raspberry” style=”border:0;” />
Ka-Ching!:
Congratulations to you, Einstein! Unfortunately, I have to endure the constant whine of people who complain about the fact that they paid hundreds of dollars more for identical Mac models with additional and/or better features or functions released 6 to 12 months later. Perhaps you would provide 24/7 online counseling services for these myopically insecure individuals. It would sure make my life a whole lot better and I will thank you for it.
Sounds too much to me like the old, old claims of “Computers are getting too fast for the average user to need. Only a very, very limited number of users will need the newest, fastest machine.” These claims have been made as far back as when the Mac IIfx came out (and the x486 on the Wintel side). It’s all rubbish.
There will always be a fairly large segment of the computer using population which will need desktop machines on the higher end. Users (and applications programmers) will always find ways to exceed the capabilities of even the fastest machines.
While the top of the line PowerMac of five years ago is serviceable today for many task, I would not want to be using iMovie, iDVD, etc. on it to make my home movies. (Don’t even think about doing these kinds of things on an iMac from five years ago unless you have the patience of Job.) Similar statements can be made of today’s top of the line: the 2.5 GHz Quad PowerMac. In five years it will barely keep up with the leading edge consumer software. Thus claiming only a very small niche really needs the highest end machines is just plain short sighted.
Also, screen real estate is a dramatic productivity improvement. While the Macbook Pro can have a 17 inch screen and the iMac can have a 20 inch screen being able to see true 1080p HDTV on a screen is a distinct advantage and will only become more so, and neither of these screens can do this. With 23 inch screens becoming reasonably priced having a large screen is now a viable option for many pro desktop users.
And so it goes…
Try maczealot brand today!
We know you’ve heard it already, but come on . . . give us a try anyway! We’re cheap!
And remember our motto:
maczealot — The fountain of obvious never stops flowing.
“The most typical use of these “Pro” desktops is when the user needs all the computational power and memory she can get on her desktop plus Mac OS X”
Correct English would dictate the use of “he” rather than “she” for a generic human of either sex. Use of the gender-neutral plural form “they” is finding some acceptance in general usage if you don’t want to follow standard form.
But use of “she” just makes you look like an emasculated pansy-waste, or a hairy-chested femi-nazi. Don’t go there; it’s not pretty.
I for one am not waiting for the new Mac Pros. I’ll predict that the first top-of-the-line Intel based Mac Pro won’t be any faster than this beast sitting next to me – a Quad G5. Sure, most of the Intel based Macs that Apple has come out with recently beat the socks off the Macs they replaced. And why shouldn’t they, they have 2 cores. When you compare a dual Intel core with a dual G5 core, the speed difference still tips in the G5’s favor. And, so far none of the Intel cores are 64-bit.
I like beans!
The new Pro Mac should make BBQ beans and fit under my home theatre receiver! That guys bio and his opinions sure don’t jive. NASA scientist want s Pro Mac that plays movies on his TV. And he lives in my city, Denver. He needs a good slapping around.
I mean sure the next Pro Mac will play movies and music. But if Apple designs a PRO Mac that will overheat with a PRO graphics card in it…
I mean WTF!! I’m sick of listening to all these people’s opinions!
I personally think Apple should soon dump the Power Mac and stick with the iMac, but update from Core Duo, since Intel currently is planning a release of a more powerful processor. I dont know, it just seems easier, my 2 cents.
For the best value for your money, plan on a desktop and a long upgrade cycle.
The PowerMac has the lowest yearly total cost of ownership.
It’s upgradeable, except for the processors, so it’s important to buy as much CPU horsepower as one can afford plus AppleCare.
When you buy one get the next level up video card, your going to wind up buying one anyway so get it right away.
Get a better monitor, more RAM, faster hard drives and video cards later down the road. It’s cheaper this way than having to break out the big bucks for a whole new machine AND new hardware/software because you skimped on the CPU.
So far with a dual 2, 30″, 6800GT, software, backup hard drives etc, I’m running about $500 a year total cost of ownership. I can 3D game, I can do anything well for the next 5-7 years.
Now all the dumb arses go out and buy a $4500 overheating CPU/GPU hobbled MacBook Pro and under three years it’s obsolete. That’s over $1200 per year TCO.
If someone steals it, or they drop it that kills it right there. And then it can’t 3D game or much of anything well with it’s small boot drive.
Once you go PowerMac, you won’t want to go back to anything else. It just keeps working.
If you need poratbility, get a MacBook or a cheap G4 iBook and bring the work home for the heavy lifting.
Performance + Laptop/Durability = A JOKE
Diana’s Head:
Hoorah for the freedom to blog without your permission, consent, or authorization. It is immensely satisfying to aggravate, vex, and annoy you from hundreds or even thousands of miles away. Since you cannot stop me, you will simply have to ignore me, adapt to me, or continue to rant about me to your heart’s content. Don’t you find modern means of communication amazing?
“Correct English would dictate the use of “he” rather than “she” for a generic human of either sex.”
Unless it’s RuPaul. The transgendered are SO sensitive too. Also, let’s not step on the toes (if they had toes) of the freshwater sponge, an asexual fellow, I mean, thing.
MW: science, as in She/He blinded me with.
Since three of the four Mac lines that have “gone Intel” so far (iMac, PowerBook, and Mac Mini) retained their previous external designs with only one (iBook) being significantly different, I’ll bet the Power Mac replacement’s external design will be mostly unchanged.
The current design is very good. I’m sure Apple already had Intel in mind when it was designed. It is quite large, but that’s the point of this model. Give the user the expansion options. Since Apple kept the “iMac” name, I hope it can keep “Power Mac” and call it a “G6.” The word “power” just seems appropriate in the name.
A “media center” Mac would be based on the Mac mini, not the current Power Mac (or it’s replacement). A Mac mini that is one inch taller to accomodate a 3.5-inch hard drive would be perfect.
all you guys need to relax.
this is apple we are talking about. there not going to release anything dodgy.
and look at the other machines that are now intel. they are all like 5x faster.
apple is going to make it worthwhile buying.
You mean to tell me that PIXAR would want to make movies relying on IMacs…. yeah right
Maybe Apple will keep it real and update the product name to “Powr2thaMac.”
Well,
Now that Mac is able to run XP, Apple should also eye a new market niche: the gamers!
These people need extra computer power (graphic card, sound etc) and could hold biggest share of the computer market.
I’ve talked to several heavy gamers friends and their hesitation to switch to mac is that most games are designed for Windows. Most of them know that Mac is better but the constraints prevent them to switch. Now they have no more reasons not to switch.
So, Apple, start to hunt them!
Hopefully, they will “Pull out all the stops” on the new Mac Pros. Blow everything else out of the water – real workstation performance. Need a high end graphics card (or 2) capable of driving a super hi-res display at a high FPS rate. That’s going to generate some serious heat though – I’ve seen Win boxes with DUAL-LIQUID COOLED graphics cards in them! GPUs get just as hot if not hotter than the CPU when under heavy load. We’ll see………..
Check out this episode of DL.TV – They show Windows running on a MBP (and mini if I remember correctly), and they show a $6000.00 Win Box with liquid cooled graphics cards bizarre but interesting nonetheless:
http://dl.tv/blogs/digitallifetv/archive/2006/04/07/9378.aspx
I have no idea what the Kilt thing is all about in the above. You’ll see……….
Best Formula…
I’m with you mate.
Powermacs are waaaaay the best value for money. And hey…they’re powerful!
My dualie is 18 months old and still performs better than a mate’s new high end Windows box – so it’ll be good for another 3 years…that’s value! My last Pmac lasted me 4 years too.
I don’t understand all the people who go on about the size of the Powermac – it’s irrelevant – I always put them UNDER my desk. Where I can stack external hard drives on the beastie BECAUSE it’s BIG.
I only put peripherals on my desk like a BSB2 hub and another burner. WHY would anyone actually put a desktop computer ON their desk?
Maybe they should be FLOORTOP computers so everyone doesn’t get so confused
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Just sayin…
This article is wrong in so many ways. This guy is claiming that apple is going to make more of a shift to the consumer market but then he fails to think like a consumer. No one is going to buy a $2000-3000 media center. It would be such ridiculous overkill when the mac mini is perfectly capable and costs 600.
Also we have to consider the price increase that’s going to come with the intel switch. People used to have this idea that PPC was one of the reasons apple was more expensive when in fact its one of the reasons it was competitive. The price apple paid for PPC chips was far lower than what windows box manufacturers paid for x86, especially on the high end. Intel’s high end chip usually costs about 800-900 dollars. The P4 Extreme Hyperthreding Baby Killer Atom Smasher Duo or whatever is currently in that price range. Of course manufacturers get them cheaper than consumers but their costs still won’t be small. Slap two of those in a powermac and you’re already at 1600-1800 without a chipset, mo-bo w/ PCI-e, ram, GPU, ethernet, wireless cards, usb cards, firewire cards, hard drive, optical drive, expansion slots, the case and Apple’s profit. Try fitting that under 3000 and call me when you give up.
I’m scared of how much these things are going to cost and if they will be faster than the G5 which was nearly perfect for the powermac. Designed for the high end high volume server market with less regard to heat and power issues than notebook chips. Intel is coming from the other direction, leading with notebooks and dragging its desktops behind, and it shows in their product. In short I think the transition to Intel was Apple risking the high end market for general marketshare and I’m mad at them for it but I hope these fears are wrong.
I think there is an additional group of PowerMac customers that this article misses…
Certainly design and publishing, film and video, photography and graphics, music and audio, as well as bioscience and research as the author put it are purchasers of the PowerMac tower machines. To those users having a box that is capable of utilizing a semi-trailer’s worth of add-on expansion cards. The ability to plug in several accessory cards are a must for this segment.
However there are other segments for whom the “consumer grade” eMac, iMac and the entire laptop lines typically are non-starters. One group is the avid Gamer segment, another is the “Prosumer” crowd which happen to have similar hardware needs that are not fulfilled by the consumer grade machines, but a full-blown tower is like using a Semi-Trailer to haul a pick-up truck bed’s worth of needs… Those needs being: A need for a top of the line CPU engine(s), a need for a modest number of slots: at least 2 but probably no more than three so that they can equip their boxes with the state of the art video graphics and sound cards (in the case of the Gamers), or specialized cards (in the case of Prosumer’s), in a smaller, preferably easily transportable box which still has a wide array of installed ports.
Many of my local Mac friends are World of WarCRACK, Unreal Tournament, Quake, Doom, etc. fiends. They are the sort of people who put a cooler in their car on Friday morning, stock it full of food and drink on the way home from work and hunker-down in the basement when they get home and game their entire weekend away, breaking only for as their bodies force them too. The Gamers build their machines around clock cycles, frame rates and the need for ultimate gaming performance. They will typically not compromise towards a machine which will not allow them to build and upgrade their platform as needed. So they need slots, but not 5-6. They also like to tailor their displays to their needs, with huge Tube monitors going for a song these days, often it costs nearly as much to ship them as it does to buy them, they will buy a big huge 20-23″ CRT for gaming at home, but if they get together for local “gamefests” will opt for a light, small and transportable LCD screen for those occasions.
The “Prosumer” has more specialized needs than are typically fulfilled by a consumer grade Mac, but their needs are not so great that they need a full slate of 5-6 expansion slots. They need to be able to tailor their system just like the gamers, but with different cards but 2-3 slots are more than enough.
There was a long period of time when Apple offered two (or more) desktop product lines, each which were closer matches to these segments needs… Dating back to the mid-1980’s with the Mac II/IIx/IIfx vs. IIcx/IIci product lines, through the early 1990’s with the Quadra 700/8×0/9×0 series, the mid and late 1990’s with the 6×00/7×00/8×00/9×00 product lines. Apple then provided a choice between 1, 3 and upwards of 6 slot expandable computers which allowed the customer to choose a chassic that best fit their present and anticipated expansion needs.
Perhaps it’s time again for Apple to consider expanding the product matrix slightly by offering that sort of choice: A “Semi-sized” industrial strength chassis for the “swiss army computer” crowd that needs as much flexibility as possible, and a “Pick ’em Up Truck-Sized” Prosumer/Gamer chassis for the Prosumer/Gamer who has much more modest expansion needs that a Consumer “Sedan” can’t fulfill and the PowerTower “Semi” is overkill.
Personally, I think it is well past time that Apple loosen up a bit on Mr. Job’s squarish product matrix… We have two Consumer Grade desktop boxes currently: Mini and iMac, and two tiers of Laptops: (the recently departed iBook and PowerBook giving way to) the MacBook and MacBook Pros. How about a two tier “Professional” segment desktop line up: A Mac Professional with a G5 5-6+ slot chassis, and a Mac Prosumer “Shorty” version of that same machine, identical save for a 3 slot chassis that can better compete with the PC competition.
If you build them both, the consumer’s cash, checkbooks and credit cards will come.
The problem with destops for Apple is that they have a much longer life-span than a laptop or iMac, and people tend to replace them less often. Laptops have durability issues and neither a laptop nor the iMac are as easily upgraded as a tower.
At home I currently have an old 450mHz Sawtooth, but it has a replacement processer running at 1.425gHz, two 250 MB hard drives, a replacement video card, a USB 2.0 card and an added Superdrive. These upgrades were done over time, and I have no intention of doing anymore, but I would still consider a tower in the future just for the same flexibility. Sorry, Steve.
“Mac Prosumer “Shorty” version of that same machine, identical save for a 3 slot chassis that can better compete with the PC competition.”
This would be the holy grail for me. A smaller form factor Mac Pro with 4 bays in the front (2 super drives and room for 2 hard drives), plus a graphics card slot, one or 2 slots for misc. expansion devices, and a “flip-door” for easy upgrade of the ram. I would buy one instantly.
We are no longer the Knights who say Ni.
I love it when Monty Python erupts on a thread.
And I’m still pissed that I bought an LC when I could have bought a Color Classic !!!