August 7th = Apple Event. HOPING for Mac Pro Update

S

Scroatdog

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 17, 2003
Messages
1,432
Apple to hold Mac-focused presentation next week

By Jim Dalrymple

Apple will gather select press at its company headquarters in Cupertino, Calif. next week for what it said would be a presentation focused on the Mac.

The presentation will take place on Tuesday August 7, 2007 at 10:00 am at Apple's Town Hall, a facility that has been used to launch several products in the past including the very first iPod.
Click to expand...

Linky

I really hope they update the Mac Pro. I've been waiting quite a while. I can't bring myself to spend $2499+ on a machine with year and a half old video cards in it.

If it's just the new iMacs I'm gonna be pretty pissed. August 7th also marks the one year anniversary of the Mac Pro. Time for some NEW HARDWARE Apple!!! This iPhone business has gotten the company severely off track!!! :mad:
 
I really think it's likely that they'll introduce new iPods at the event...

THOUGH all of the reports I'm reading now say that it will be an event focused exclusively on the computers.

Personally, I'm hoping (beyond hope) for some sort of 12" Macbook Pro. But that's just because I'm soon to head to college, and I want a 12" Macbook Pro. Really, I think it's not very likely.

iMac, however, is guaranteed.

I think they'll update the Mac Pros sometime soon, but it's possible they will just keep the same form factor, and just update the specs, and thus won't mention it in a special event.

But as always, this is all guesswork. Except for the iMacs. Those sound guaranteed.
 
The note to the press mentioned only Mac hardware. For this reason, I don't think we'll see iPods at the event.
 
Legomancer said:
I really think it's likely that they'll introduce new iPods at the event...

THOUGH all of the reports I'm reading now say that it will be an event focused exclusively on the computers.

Personally, I'm hoping (beyond hope) for some sort of 12" Macbook Pro. But that's just because I'm soon to head to college, and I want a 12" Macbook Pro. Really, I think it's not very likely.

iMac, however, is guaranteed.

I think they'll update the Mac Pros sometime soon, but it's possible they will just keep the same form factor, and just update the specs, and thus won't mention it in a special event.

But as always, this is all guesswork. Except for the iMacs. Those sound guaranteed.
Click to expand...


The iMac is not guaranteed just a rumor...i wont belive its guaranteed till Steve Jobs himself comes to my house and has dinner with me and my family and announces it then....
 
It's been specifically stated and confirmed by at least two sources that it won't be iPod or iPhone related, so you can save the iPod hopes for a while.

I'd say new iMac is almost certain (as much as you can be with an Apple announcement). Cinema Display updates seem possible given their commitment to switch to LED backlit screens by the end of the year. Mac Pro is a maybe, and a mini update/killing/replacement, while sorely needed doesn't seem that likely (but who knows).

While I think it's very unlikely, given the focus they seem to want to put on Macs, they may even unveil a wide redesign across much of the line (iMac, mini, Mac Pro, maybe MacBook) - if they're unveiling a new look past the current white polycarbonate and aluminum looks, it may be the way to go, but probably not a likely one.
 
Eragon Dragonslayer said:
The iMac is not guaranteed just a rumor...i wont belive its guaranteed till Steve Jobs himself comes to my house and has dinner with me and my family and announces it then....
Click to expand...

True nothing is really guaranteed with apple. The problem i see with the hardware only thing is that the apple stocks just plummeted with the reason being the announcement of new iPods.... And do remember the iPod is technically hardware as well
 
Biest said:
True nothing is really guaranteed with apple. The problem i see with the hardware only thing is that the apple stocks just plummeted with the reason being the announcement of new iPods.... And do remember the iPod is technically hardware as well
Click to expand...

The apple stock plummeted on unfounded (and refuted) rumours of cuts in iPhone production.

Secondly, two separate sources have stated that Apple specifically stated no iPod or iPhone news (probably to avoid a hit to their stock due to no iPod news, as it has been subject to big swings on speculation lately). So it could technically be appleTV as well, or something new all together.
 
I'm curious what video card the OP hopes to get....the 8600M GT is hardly a year and a half old card. And there really isn't anything out there in the same wattage range that is any better...unless Apple is now in the business of designing super secret video cards I don't forsee an update coming there.
 
I would like to see a "Extreme" MBP option with Blu Ray, HDMI, and even a higher powered Video card. :D
 
Erasmus354 said:
I'm curious what video card the OP hopes to get....the 8600M GT is hardly a year and a half old card. And there really isn't anything out there in the same wattage range that is any better...unless Apple is now in the business of designing super secret video cards I don't forsee an update coming there.
Click to expand...

The original poster is talking about the Mac Pro, not the MacBook Pro.
 
Erasmus354 said:
I'm curious what video card the OP hopes to get....the 8600M GT is hardly a year and a half old card. And there really isn't anything out there in the same wattage range that is any better...unless Apple is now in the business of designing super secret video cards I don't forsee an update coming there.
Click to expand...

I too was wondering what the OP really expects from a Mac Pro. Historically, Apple hasn't included the absolute newest video cards in anything. Because their target audience for machines such as the Mac Pro generally find the video card options provided by Apple to be perfectly acceptable. It's a workstation. . .not a gaming rig. If you look at Dell's Precision Workstations, their video options consist of nVidia Quadro and ATI FireGL cards - not GeForce or Radeons. If Apple deserves any heat for their video card options for the Mac Pro, it should be that they don't offer more nVidia Quadro options than just the 4500. But as I said, 99% of Mac Pro users are really just fine with the 7300GT or X1900XT. Really.

I also wonder what the OP means when he talks about the 1-year anniversary of the Mac Pro. They were just revved in April 2007 with the intro of the 8-core version. I calculate that as 4 months ago, but maybe my math is off.

iMac is MUCH more in need of a revision. They were last revved in late 2006. They most likely updates are going to be an LED LCD, processor speed bumps, and larger standard HDs. . .and it's been rumored that the iMac will see an aluminium finish like the Cinema Displays. We'll see.
 
CreativeMac said:
I too was wondering what the OP really expects from a Mac Pro. Historically, Apple hasn't included the absolute newest video cards in anything. Because their target audience for machines such as the Mac Pro generally find the video card options provided by Apple to be perfectly acceptable. It's a workstation. . .not a gaming rig. If you look at Dell's Precision Workstations, their video options consist of nVidia Quadro and ATI FireGL cards - not GeForce or Radeons. If Apple deserves any heat for their video card options for the Mac Pro, it should be that they don't offer more nVidia Quadro options than just the 4500. But as I said, 99% of Mac Pro users are really just fine with the 7300GT or X1900XT. Really.

I also wonder what the OP means when he talks about the 1-year anniversary of the Mac Pro. They were just revved in April 2007 with the intro of the 8-core version. I calculate that as 4 months ago, but maybe my math is off.

iMac is MUCH more in need of a revision. They were last revved in late 2006. They most likely updates are going to be an LED LCD, processor speed bumps, and larger standard HDs. . .and it's been rumored that the iMac will see an aluminium finish like the Cinema Displays. We'll see.
Click to expand...
they introduced the 8 core version, but didn't touch any of the lower ones...

my (educated) guess would be iMac bumps
 
CreativeMac said:
I too was wondering what the OP really expects from a Mac Pro. Historically, Apple hasn't included the absolute newest video cards in anything. Because their target audience for machines such as the Mac Pro generally find the video card options provided by Apple to be perfectly acceptable. It's a workstation. . .not a gaming rig. If you look at Dell's Precision Workstations, their video options consist of nVidia Quadro and ATI FireGL cards - not GeForce or Radeons. If Apple deserves any heat for their video card options for the Mac Pro, it should be that they don't offer more nVidia Quadro options than just the 4500. But as I said, 99% of Mac Pro users are really just fine with the 7300GT or X1900XT. Really.

I also wonder what the OP means when he talks about the 1-year anniversary of the Mac Pro. They were just revved in April 2007 with the intro of the 8-core version. I calculate that as 4 months ago, but maybe my math is off.

iMac is MUCH more in need of a revision. They were last revved in late 2006. They most likely updates are going to be an LED LCD, processor speed bumps, and larger standard HDs. . .and it's been rumored that the iMac will see an aluminium finish like the Cinema Displays. We'll see.
Click to expand...


some people would LIKE to replace their gaming rig with a mac pro that can boot windows if needed for gaming.
 
Martyr said:
some people would LIKE to replace their gaming rig with a mac pro that can boot windows if needed for gaming.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I'd rather have one rig than two, for ergonomic and power reasons. Why have two rigs when I can accomplish the same thing on one?

As for Macs not being geared toward gamers, I do agree with you. HOWEVER, at the most recent WWDC Steve Jobs brought out the execs from id and EA games saying that a whole new range of games were coming to the Mac.

Additionally, why would they include the x1900xt as an option? My guess is to appease gamers. But I am not about to spend that kind of money and get a year and a half old card, when plenty of other new options exist today. Couple that with the fact that Apple charges $400.00 for the card, which is quite ridiculous considering that an 8800GTS (640) can be had for about 80 dollars less.

And I (and many, many others) don't consider the April introduction of the 4-core Xeons as an update, merely an "option". It was a drop in CPU solution, not an update.

Apple now offers two gigs standard in their Pro laptops. They can easily change the Mac Pro offerings to 2 gigs in the base configuration, considering that the price of FB-DIMMS has decreased quite a bit since the Mac Pro's introduction on August 7th, 2006. Also, let's not forget about Intel's price drops. Apple can shift the entire line to dual quad-core configurations, along with 2 gig FB-DIMM standard and still maintain their current profit margin.

Every video card offering in the Mac Pro today is outdated.The x1900xt (if you can find one), retails for about $150.00, yet apple charges $400.00 for the card itself, or an additional $250 if you configure it in the build-to-order on their website.

Let's not also forget about DX10 capability. I intend to make use of BootCamp and Parallels to run Windows as well. I'd like DX10 capability. I'd like a card from 2007, considering the year is already half over. Paying 2006 prices for 2006 hardware just does not make fiscal sense. The Mac Pro is a year old next Tuesday, and Apple really needs to do something about it.
 
It would be odd to drop so many major updates (MacPro, ACD, iMac) at once, especially such disparate ones.

They might do a slight spec bump on the MacPro, but with Penryn 6 months away, they would be crazy to do a major update right now.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/processors/?p=133

There are large LCD panels out there, saw on Engadget that Samsung is showing off a 30 inch one at the moment. However, I don't think its gone past preproduction concepts at the moment, but I could be wrong.

If I were a betting man, I would say...
>August 7th: New iLife, new iMac
>October: New iPod
>January 2008 (MacWorld): New MacPro and ACD, updated 3G iPhone
 
If they're going to wait until January to update the Mac Pro I might as well go the hackint0sh route.
 
Martyr said:
some people would LIKE to replace their gaming rig with a mac pro that can boot windows if needed for gaming.
Click to expand...

Scroatdog said:
Exactly. I'd rather have one rig than two, for ergonomic and power reasons. Why have two rigs when I can accomplish the same thing on one?

As for Macs not being geared toward gamers, I do agree with you. HOWEVER, at the most recent WWDC Steve Jobs brought out the execs from id and EA games saying that a whole new range of games were coming to the Mac.

Additionally, why would they include the x1900xt as an option? My guess is to appease gamers. But I am not about to spend that kind of money and get a year and a half old card, when plenty of other new options exist today. Couple that with the fact that Apple charges $400.00 for the card, which is quite ridiculous considering that an 8800GTS (640) can be had for about 80 dollars less.

And I (and many, many others) don't consider the April introduction of the 4-core Xeons as an update, merely an "option". It was a drop in CPU solution, not an update.

Apple now offers two gigs standard in their Pro laptops. They can easily change the Mac Pro offerings to 2 gigs in the base configuration, considering that the price of FB-DIMMS has decreased quite a bit since the Mac Pro's introduction on August 7th, 2006. Also, let's not forget about Intel's price drops. Apple can shift the entire line to dual quad-core configurations, along with 2 gig FB-DIMM standard and still maintain their current profit margin.

Every video card offering in the Mac Pro today is outdated.The x1900xt (if you can find one), retails for about $150.00, yet apple charges $400.00 for the card itself, or an additional $250 if you configure it in the build-to-order on their website.

Let's not also forget about DX10 capability. I intend to make use of BootCamp and Parallels to run Windows as well. I'd like DX10 capability. I'd like a card from 2007, considering the year is already half over. Paying 2006 prices for 2006 hardware just does not make fiscal sense. The Mac Pro is a year old next Tuesday, and Apple really needs to do something about it.
Click to expand...

Guys. . .my comments were about what is - not what should be. Sure it would be nice to have a workstation gaming rig. . .but gaming just is not the target market for the Mac Pro. It just isn't. The target market for the Mac Pro is design professionals - who, for the most part, are just fine with the video options currently available.

You're technically correct that the move to 8-core in 4/07 is more of an update than a revision. However, whenever somone has screamed for a revision to the Mac Pro noone has been able to answer the following question to my satisfaction -
Outside of configuration options - CPU, std memory & HD, and video card options - what is screaming for revision on the Mac Pro? Especially if you're going to say that the move to 8-core isn't a "revision", then for the same reasons neither are additional video card alternatives. And if you're arguement comes down to your favorite video card not being available for the Mac Pro, can we agree that Apple has a finite amount of control of that situation? And if that's the case, why not address what you seee as the real problem - the lack of more current video options for the Mac Pro. . .not so much the Mac Pro itself.

Now, like I said. . .my previous post covered what is. . .not what I think should be. For what I think should be. . .I think Apple should release the following machine -
-- A small tower with two optical drive bays and two hard drive bays
-- Logic board with two slots - one for the video card and one free
-- A single full-power Core2Duo processor - not the laptop-spec C2Ds that the MB, MBP, and iMac use. This would also allow for RAM faster than the FB-DIMMs required by Xeon processors.
-- Make say something like a X1900XT standard with an option for an 8800GTS and/or an 8800 Ultra. The tradeoff being that you may lose the second slot when using the higher-end cards. There would need to be help fron nVidia here.
-- On the back/internally - Two FW ports. . .4 USB2 ports. . .1 or 2 eSATA ports. . .Gb ethernet. . .802.11n. . .Bluetooth. . .sound (one mini-plug and one optical)
-- On the front - One FW port. . .two USB2 ports. . .headphone jack

That said. . .I think Apple will never build this machine.
 
CreativeMac said:
Guys. . .my comments were about what is - not what should be. Sure it would be nice to have a workstation gaming rig. . .but gaming just is not the target market for the Mac Pro. It just isn't. The target market for the Mac Pro is design professionals - who, for the most part, are just fine with the video options currently available.
Click to expand...

That may be true, but then why is the x1900xt in there as an option at all?? If it were a purely workstation-oriented machine, I think all video card options would be of the FireGL or Quadro variety.

As far as updating the Mac Pro, I believe all the points I made are valid. Their Pro laptops now come with 2 gigs RAM standard. The Mac Pro should as well, considering the price of FB-DIMMs has decreased significantly since last August. Apple can offer 2 gigs standard, like they are now doing on the MacBook Pro's, and still maintain their profit margin. Same goes for moving the line to an all dual quad-core lineup. The Intel price drops would allow Apple the same profit margin, and at the same time offering all octo-core machines.

Back to the video cards, even the quadro 4500 is a year and a half old. There are newer workstation-class cards available, yet Apple maintains the same slow update cycle of the PPC days. They can't use PPC as an excuse anymore since they are now on an Intel cycle. If they hadn't gone the EFI route people would be able to put whatever video cards they wanted in the machine.

How many revisions has the MacBook Pro seen since it's inception? At least three I can count off the top of my head, yet the Mac Pro remains stagnant. We have a valid argument here. It is simply unappealing to pay 2006 prices for 2006 hardware in the middle of 2007.
 
Scroatdog said:
That may be true, but then why is the x1900xt in there as an option at all?? If it were a purely workstation-oriented machine, I think all video card options would be of the FireGL or Quadro variety.

As far as updating the Mac Pro, I believe all the points I made are valid. Their Pro laptops now come with 2 gigs RAM standard. The Mac Pro should as well, considering the price of FB-DIMMs has decreased significantly since last August. Apple can offer 2 gigs standard, like they are now doing on the MacBook Pro's, and still maintain their profit margin. Same goes for moving the line to an all dual quad-core lineup. The Intel price drops would allow Apple the same profit margin, and at the same time offering all octo-core machines.

Back to the video cards, even the quadro 4500 is a year and a half old. There are newer workstation-class cards available, yet Apple maintains the same slow update cycle of the PPC days. They can't use PPC as an excuse anymore since they are now on an Intel cycle. If they hadn't gone the EFI route people would be able to put whatever video cards they wanted in the machine.

How many revisions has the MacBook Pro seen since it's inception? At least three I can count off the top of my head, yet the Mac Pro remains stagnant. We have a valid argument here. It is simply unappealing to pay 2006 prices for 2006 hardware in the middle of 2007.
Click to expand...

Perhaps we quibble over terms here. It sounds like you're pining for better configuration options - video cards, bigger standard HD, more standard RAM, etc. Typically, this is called a refresh or just a configuration change. To a point, that's fair enough. But while resellers such as CDW, MacMall, etc have some standard boxed configurations, the online Apple Store makes you CTO the Mac Pro anyway. So "standard" is what you make it - given the available options. Apple-supplied memory and HD upgrades are of little concern to most of us here since we can almost always find those pieces cheaper elsewhere, regardless of when in the product life cycle we're talking about. The complaint about limited video card options is a valid one, but again, Apple has only a finite amount of control of the situation. Given the small quantities Apple would buy, Apple really can't force nVidia to make a wide selection of Mac-compatible cards. So Apple is somewhat at nVidia's mercy on this.

Typically, when the computer industry says "revision" there are more significant changes - enclosure or form factor, significant logic board changes, etc.
 
Scroatdog said:
That may be true, but then why is the x1900xt in there as an option at all?? If it were a purely workstation-oriented machine, I think all video card options would be of the FireGL or Quadro variety.

As far as updating the Mac Pro, I believe all the points I made are valid. Their Pro laptops now come with 2 gigs RAM standard. The Mac Pro should as well, considering the price of FB-DIMMs has decreased significantly since last August. Apple can offer 2 gigs standard, like they are now doing on the MacBook Pro's, and still maintain their profit margin. Same goes for moving the line to an all dual quad-core lineup. The Intel price drops would allow Apple the same profit margin, and at the same time offering all octo-core machines.

Back to the video cards, even the quadro 4500 is a year and a half old. There are newer workstation-class cards available, yet Apple maintains the same slow update cycle of the PPC days. They can't use PPC as an excuse anymore since they are now on an Intel cycle. If they hadn't gone the EFI route people would be able to put whatever video cards they wanted in the machine.

How many revisions has the MacBook Pro seen since it's inception? At least three I can count off the top of my head, yet the Mac Pro remains stagnant. We have a valid argument here. It is simply unappealing to pay 2006 prices for 2006 hardware in the middle of 2007.
Click to expand...

why are we arguing about this? This is kind of silly.
 
Why X1900XT? Not for gaming. It is the step between the 7300 and Quadro. I have seen it used for video editing most, e.g. commercials, etc.

I must stress the Mac Pro is FAR from a gaming rig, this is a WORKSTATION. Would any sane person use Dual Xeons for gaming? No... The target market is still:

1. Photography and editing
2. Video Editing
3. Scientific Computing
4. Visualization
5. Medical Computing
 
I hate to break it to you, but the x1900xt is (or was) a gaming card.

And, as for Apple having only finite control over the situation, not true. They are the same card as found in PC's, only the cards bios are different. People have purchased PC versions of the x1900 and flashed them with the Mac ROM to make them work, in order to save money. Because, believe it or not, Apple to this day charges $400.00 a copy. All it takes is someone at Apple to write the drivers for a particular card, and to supply the card manufacturer(s) with the appropriate ROM for the card.
 
Heres my mac pro wishlist...


The mac pro motherboard has 4 pci-e slots correct? they run at x8?

So put 2 QX6800's in there, 16 gigs of ram, 4...yes FOUR! 8800 Ultras in there in Quad SLI, have like...4 raptors in raid 0, and like 4TB for multimedia storage...and can anyone say frame rates soo fast itll explode ur monitor!!!
 
Except the mac pro doesn't support 8800's in OSX

The Mac Pro will probably never accept video cards on the PC side in OSX to perform at native levels. Apple's too busy charging an ARM and a leg for those video cards to be mac compatible.

Thus the mac pro will never be a gaming machine because you can't easily swap video cards. Who wants to go through 1 VENDOR to purchase video cards? Sure you can purchase video cards from macmall or where-ever else, but the prices WILL be the same.

Apple dictates the price because apple is the only provider of their hardware. They are unlikely to open up their platform to oems producing video cards and its a shame really.

Why would you pay 1.5 - 2x more for a card on the mac side that's being dropped in price on the pc side?

Gaming = not a priority on macs and never will be, end of story.
 
Syndication said:
Except the mac pro doesn't support 8800's in OSX

The Mac Pro will probably never accept video cards on the PC side in OSX to perform at native levels. Apple's too busy charging an ARM and a leg for those video cards to be mac compatible.

Thus the mac pro will never be a gaming machine because you can't easily swap video cards. Who wants to go through 1 VENDOR to purchase video cards? Sure you can purchase video cards from macmall or where-ever else, but the prices WILL be the same.

Apple dictates the price because apple is the only provider of their hardware. They are unlikely to open up their platform to oems producing video cards and its a shame really.

Why would you pay 1.5 - 2x more for a card on the mac side that's being dropped in price on the pc side?
Click to expand...

You are kinda sorta correct. Apple doesn't sell those cards exclusively; you can buy videocards from ATI for Macs if you want through any other retail channel (as you can with RAM and hard drives). The problem is that OS X doesn't use BIOS, it uses EFI, and before the move to Intel CPUs it used Open Firmware on PowerPC. The videocard needs to support whatever it is on so you can't use a standard PC videocard on a Mac.

At the same time, videocard companies don't sell very many of these cards for the Mac platform so they are going to cost more than their PC counterparts. It kinda sucks for gaming considering how great the hardware is otherwise. As for the gaming thing, you're right, it isn't a priority. Shame too because other than that I much prefer Macs at this point and is the main reason I keep a PC around.

I do wonder what the reaction would be from Mac Pro users to an aftermarket EFI compatible GeForce 8800 GTX sold by someone like eVGA. Would there be enough sales to justify such a thing?
 
Serpico said:
You are kinda sorta correct. Apple doesn't sell those cards exclusively; you can buy videocards from ATI for Macs if you want through any other retail channel (as you can with RAM and hard drives). The problem is that OS X doesn't use BIOS, it uses EFI, and before the move to Intel CPUs it used Open Firmware on PowerPC. The videocard needs to support whatever it is on so you can't use a standard PC videocard on a Mac.

At the same time, videocard companies don't sell very many of these cards for the Mac platform so they are going to cost more than their PC counterparts. It kinda sucks for gaming considering how great the hardware is otherwise. As for the gaming thing, you're right, it isn't a priority. Shame too because other than that I much prefer Macs at this point and is the main reason I keep a PC around.

I do wonder what the reaction would be from Mac Pro users to an aftermarket EFI compatible GeForce 8800 GTX sold by someone like eVGA. Would there be enough sales to justify such a thing?
Click to expand...

In a sense, it is OSX moving itself outside the market. Apple chose EFI because they wanted to restrict use of moving OSX onto computers that aren't produced by Apple. You can't fault them, but at the same time they accepted the consequences of going with EFI.

There would not be enough sales to supplement production of a mac version for the 8800. That's a silly question with mac desktops registering around less than 5% of total sales. The mac version of the 8800 would probably cost 2 or 3x just get on the market. In short, there would be no incentive to produce because the opportunity costs are too high.

While I like macs, I really hate the fact that all support has to go through apple. Why would I pay some technician at apple $300 when I could do the job myself? Sure there are 3rd party sites that offer outrageous rates for parts, but why can't I order apple spare parts to do the work on my own. That's like saying if I buy a car, I have to go directly to the dealership to get EVERYTHING.

Recently Ford tried to pull this scam selling keys with microchips inside so you could only go to them to get spares. A Class action lawsuit was filed for this outrageous decision.

You'll never have 3rd party video cards on the mac side because Apple controls every aspect about their computer, even their repair and control of spare parts. (Repair prices are similar no matter where you take it to since you have to go through apple to get the parts).

Gaming will never be as good on the mac as it is on the PC. I really like the design of Apple computers and own 4 myself, but I hate the fact that a new keyboard on macbook pro costs $100+. That's a total rip off.
 
Syndication said:
In a sense, it is OSX moving itself outside the market. Apple chose EFI because they wanted to restrict use of moving OSX onto computers that aren't produced by Apple. You can't fault them, but at the same time they accepted the consequences of going with EFI.

There would not be enough sales to supplement production of a mac version for the 8800. That's a silly question with mac desktops registering around less than 5% of total sales. The mac version of the 8800 would probably cost 2 or 3x just get on the market. In short, there would be no incentive to produce because the opportunity costs are too high.

While I like macs, I really hate the fact that all support has to go through apple. Why would I pay some technician at apple $300 when I could do the job myself? Sure there are 3rd party sites that offer outrageous rates for parts, but why can't I order apple spare parts to do the work on my own. That's like saying if I buy a car, I have to go directly to the dealership to get EVERYTHING.

Recently Ford tried to pull this scam selling keys with microchips inside so you could only go to them to get spares. A Class action lawsuit was filed for this outrageous decision.

You'll never have 3rd party video cards on the mac side because Apple controls every aspect about their computer, even their repair and control of spare parts. (Repair prices are similar no matter where you take it to since you have to go through apple to get the parts).

Gaming will never be as good on the mac as it is on the PC. I really like the design of Apple computers and own 4 myself, but I hate the fact that a new keyboard on macbook pro costs $100+. That's a total rip off.
Click to expand...

a mac 8800 would be the same as a pc 8800, just a different driver.

many keys are chipped nowadays, this isnt just ford.
 
Martyr said:
a mac 8800 would be the same as a pc 8800, just a different driver.

many keys are chipped nowadays, this isnt just ford.
Click to expand...

Then you would still incur the overhead for writing and supporting the 8800 driver for the mac side and the cost of including a ROM for EFI. At the end of the day, it's not worth developing a high end stand alone video card for so little benefit. Hell what's in the mac pro is 100% x86 parts. What makes you think 3rd party oems are going to bend over backward for that 3-4% using EFI? None.

As for car companies making electronic keys

In a study of the cost of replacing keys in 50 makes and models of vehicles in the Washington, D.C., area, Ditlow’s group found that the average cost of an old-fashioned mechanical key was $12, while the average local dealer price of a “smart” or electronic key was $152. The highest key replacement cost was $335 for a 2004 Lexus IS300.

Ditlow speculates that with a healthy profit coming from their service and parts replacement divisions, auto companies are reluctant to make the codes for their electronic keys more readily available. For their part, automakers say making the information readily accessible would lessen the effectiveness of their anti-theft systems. To remedy this, Ditlow has suggested that the National Insurance Crime Bureau, which combats theft and insurance fraud, maintain a database of key codes so they can be easily located.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11961087

The same can be said for apple, when you have a closed system meaning you have to go to one source for all the parts, including support and everything, you aren't going to get a competitive rate. You're going to pay whatever the company says you're going to pay.

Apple isn't going to "let" you choose your video card, they're going to support only a few and if they don't build them with it, they won't support it.
 
Syndication said:
Except the mac pro doesn't support 8800's in OSX

The Mac Pro will probably never accept video cards on the PC side in OSX to perform at native levels. Apple's too busy charging an ARM and a leg for those video cards to be mac compatible.

Thus the mac pro will never be a gaming machine because you can't easily swap video cards. Who wants to go through 1 VENDOR to purchase video cards? Sure you can purchase video cards from macmall or where-ever else, but the prices WILL be the same.

Apple dictates the price because apple is the only provider of their hardware. They are unlikely to open up their platform to oems producing video cards and its a shame really.

Why would you pay 1.5 - 2x more for a card on the mac side that's being dropped in price on the pc side?

Gaming = not a priority on macs and never will be, end of story.
Click to expand...

Well i would think that gaming is getting closer to being a priority on a mac because of EA's recent decision to produce games for apple...and alot of companies are watching EA's move to see what happens and if it goes great then other publishers will start making games for Mac and Apple will be forced to start providing drivers for all video cards or start putting higher end cards into their macs...because no one wants to play crysis at 640 x 480 all settings low just to get a decent framerate...
 
Syndication said:
Except the mac pro doesn't support 8800's in OSX

The Mac Pro will probably never accept video cards on the PC side in OSX to perform at native levels. Apple's too busy charging an ARM and a leg for those video cards to be mac compatible. .
Click to expand...

Just because a video card isn't currently supported, doesn't mean it won't be in the future.
Also, what do you mean by perform at "native levels" the only thing that is different from a video card from a PC to a mac is that it is compatible with EFI bios systems.
 
hungryduck said:
Just because a video card isn't currently supported, doesn't mean it won't be in the future.
Also, what do you mean by perform at "native levels" the only thing that is different from a video card from a PC to a mac is that it is compatible with EFI bios systems.
Click to expand...

While the choice of words may not have been perfect, I think he was referring to the fact that drivers can make a very big difference in performance. All else being equal, a game on windows would likely perform better than on OS X because nVidia and ATI/AMD have tons of programmers constantly updating the drivers, squeezing more performance out, whereas there aren't that many programmers at Apple concerned with video cards, especially not optimizing them for specific games. In practice of course this is compounded by the fact that everything else isn't equal between OS X and Windows, with OpenGL/DirectX and other factors.

Personally I'd be happy if you could get decent support for new cards (ie functional 3D, doesn't have to be smoking fast or anything, and boots in OS X), so that you could at least have a dual boot system, use OSX for whatever you need, then boot over into Windows for gaming.
 
In my professional opinion, They will be releasing new iMacs with a redesign....

I am sensing iLife 08 and iWork 08 as well.....

Also, They will update the Mac Pro with new Video Card options, thats it.

iPod maybe... Maybe some new features for Leopard with a confirm that launch will occor in October.
 
I don't think this has been mentioned in the thread yet, but an overhaul of .Mac seems plausible, given Jobs' earlier statements. Would fit in nicely with an iLife/iWork announcement if that happens to be the case.
 
Eragon Dragonslayer said:
Well i would think that gaming is getting closer to being a priority on a mac because of EA's recent decision to produce games for apple...and alot of companies are watching EA's move to see what happens and if it goes great then other publishers will start making games for Mac and Apple will be forced to start providing drivers for all video cards or start putting higher end cards into their macs...because no one wants to play crysis at 640 x 480 all settings low just to get a decent framerate...
Click to expand...

And the performance might suck because they are ports of Direct X games. Mac's might get more of a niche market in terms of light gaming, but don't expect gaming to overflow on the mac side. The design of Apple's computers are as much of a blessing as a curse when it comes to the hands off approach inside the internals.

Only 1 computer produced by apple can accept a PCI-E video card. The imac doesn't count since no 3rd party makes a modular video card for the slot on the imac's motherboard. Now I applaud Apple's efforts to make a computer more simple, but everything is done with a cost.

If anything, light gaming will be on the mac, but all heavy gaming will still be done on PC's where switching out parts every 6 months is standard.

I use my mac for a testing platform as well as my pc. Each holds distinct advantages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top