o so the new mac can take 8 core chips then? o wait, it can only cope with 12, let me get the calculator out for you,

6 + 6 = 12

8 + 8 = 16

12 is less than 16, so it cant use the latest hardware, or did your apple tell you 8+8=12?

lmao, jack you can try to make it sound all singing all dancing as much as you want, the fact is it isn't and is behind.

 

No, TSMC continue to have production issues and Tim Cook is fed up of sucking lemons. So he sent Apple grovelling back to Samsung to get the assurance of quality and volume for the 14nm A9 chips. Here's some more Samsung marketing for you, "Samsung Inside", better get used to it!!

 

I'm already used to it and it's great, Samsung make great chips and I still love my TV after all these years. They can't write an operating system though, so have to make do with freeware for their own devices, they should invest in making an OS rather than sponsoring the Olympics.

 

I tell you what you run OSX and Final Cut on your extra processors and let me know how it compares to the Mac Pro. Bigger numbers aren't always better Tidgy you need to look at the whole picture, try not to be so simplistic.

 

lol, we use them for heavy network modeling with 196gb of ram. Looking at the tech specs of the new machines that are comming in then they can be set to use 512gb ram on them, not sure if were running any of them yet though.

The mac can't run that much ram either can it?

just because the apps you use wont jack doesn't mean others will, apple is not cutting edge tech, never has been.

Were talkin profesional apps here, not playing around at home.

 

Cutting Edge Network Modelling, probably not, wrong market, too many neckbeards.

How does Final Cut Pro work on your network modelling machines? I'd put a bet it would take you weeks to install, then it would fall over every five minutes, what benefit are your extra numbers now?

 

Hi Jack

Must agree with Tidgy as you know many people rather use Adobe Premiere Pro than Final Cut,its not just home based producers etc.but mainly they're used by many professional studios,TV,Post production companies etc

Mac Pro is great machine,if its worth not sure,when you can build similar PC for lot less and will/can run MacOSX without the single issue

In professional apps I'm using PC,its tried and tested in many apps and mainly support from companies

If I would buy something what I want to use mainly at home, probably I would think get MacBook,but after owning one,not sure if I would buy again one



Jura

 

i presume you drink water? by network modeling i mean hydraulic networks, whole citys and such, without them you'd be struggling now adays to get water to your taps.

Boils down to mac's don't start with the raw power and arn't expandable enough, no mater how you try to swing it jack, they wont do the job we need the machiens to do.

 

Apple make products that just work. If you don't want to fiddle or don't need anything too demanding then its hard to overlook an Apple product.

If you like to "play" with tech then I wouldn't recommend Apple because their architecture is deliberately restrictive to prevent screw ups by the user.

There is a guy in work here who has Mac's at home and he swears by them. Sullies himself everyday using a windows PC. He sees it as the intellectuals choice. He also believes he isn't brainwashed by marketing hype

 

Once you get into the 'workstation' market, then all the major manufacturers in that market make systems that 'just work'.

Apple are no different to any other manufacturer in that market, and indeed are usually bypassed unless there is a specific Mac-only requirement. The new Mac Pro is only attractive if you have such a requirement - as a general workstation it is easily outclassed by other systems.

 

The Mac Pro is squarely aimed at people who run Apple software. Let's say I get a new job, if I see a Mac Pro I can crack on, now you could build me a PC that will help me do my job but you'd be spending more in labour than the savings you've made by using DIY.

Apple are very different to any other manufacturer, they produce the hardware to run their software, that's unique and envied.

Saying that the Mac Pro is **** because it has a few lower number in a couple of places is laughable.

 

For a work PC, anyone that takes more than an hour including a cuppa half way through to build a PC shouldn't be in the IT department

 

Allow extra time for installing OSX.

 

That's a lame argument. If I see a Windows workstation running Windows software, I could crack on too. You use whatever hardware/software that enables you to do your job. What's your point?

 

My point is being told that the Mac Pro is **** because you can squeeze a couple more processors into a server room is a silly argument.

 

Which is basically exactly what I said.

Simply not true I'm afraid - 'proper' workstations will come working out the box from the supplier. You might have to install and activate application software, but that is no different to a Mac.

Don't make the mistake of assuming all workstations are running Windows - they may well be running Linux or Unix, depending on the use case.

It's certainly not unique (Sun/Oracle and Solaris comes immediately to mind), and in terms of 'envy' it's a double-edged sword when you start making hardware elements proprietary, as it makes it far more difficult for a company to produce a hardware product that would work cross-platform; something like a capture card, or a GPGPU like the Tesla cards as examples.

It comes back to what we have already agreed on - a Mac Pro is only appealing to someone who specifically needs to run in an OSX environment. As soon as that absolute requirement dissipates (software available on other platform for example) then the Mac Pro no longer makes any sense other than a pure aesthetic choice. Not that there're anything wrong with that.

I never said it was ****, I said it was outclassed, and not by a 'few lower numbers'. I can supply you a 4-socket workstation with up to 40 cores and GPGPUs that will sit under your desk. Yes, it will be a 'boring' black box, and yes it will be rather louder, but you buy such a system for performance, which it has in spades.

 

I doubt anyone will be buying it to run anything other than OSX so comparing it to a 40 core Windows workstation is a waste of time. As big a waste of time as saying the Mac Pro is outdated because it has however many less of whatever, which brought us here. Hopefully Tidgy has learnt something.

 

As have you I hope; Apple are not the only manufacturer that make both the hardware and software.

 

Of course they're not, but if you want a PC - and that's what we're talking about here - then you have Windows, Linux and OSX unless you want to be picky.

 

Are you not paying the extra for a prettier box with an apple?

 

wow you changed your tune quickly, you were syaing it was all singing all dancing, now your saying its a big improvment over existing mac, yet not as good as a pc can be speced up to?

 

Yes you are, you're paying for a box that has amazing cooling properties, just like you might pay to sink your PC in oil or buy a neon lit super fan.

 

Not true. Here's my original response

"You really have no idea what you're talking about. Which Mac Pro is more up to date than the unreleased Mac Pro? Please don't reply with a Windows or Linux PC, I couldn't take that much laughter on such a hot day."

In response to you stating that the unreleased Mac Pro was out of date.

Same tune.

 

lmao, never have overheating issues here

you dont half sprout some sales sh1te jack

 

Tidgy, show me a picture of your case and record the noise it makes. I think you'll find the value somewhere in those two.

 

the bold underlined comment you quoted is the important bit lol way to shoot yourself in the foot jack.

So how long a day do you spend learning apple marketing BS, is it a 4 hour a day job?

 

If you want "workstation class" performance and scalability then you go with Windows or Linux/Unix. The Mac Pro, whilst it looks nice and actually has quite an innovative construction, but ask any professional what they want out of a workstation, it looking nice and small will only be a minor consideration if at all for something that spends most of it's life under a desk or in a cabinet. Ultimately it is restricted by it's design.

 

OK Jon, what do you suggest as I need a new desktop, an old Mac Pro as it looks like a PC box? I can't do my job without OSX and according to Tidgy there's better out there, what are my options?

 

You don't get neon fans in Mac's? Ha ha fail.

 

You certainly could put a neon fan in a Mac, whatever floats your boat.