WWDC: 2013

I'm pretty sure the new Mac Pro can be configured with dual processors, no? I didn't know there was a 12 core xeon processor in the intel lineup
 
Any way to get on the ios 7 beta without paying those sites 10$ or so and giving them your udid?
 
Looking at the inside of it there only seems to be room for one CPU. The new E5 top end CPU is 12 core and the E7 which is out quarter 4 2013 is going to be 15 cores so 30 threads.

I have been reading up on the new Mac Pro and it seems to have a dual CPU setup you can daisy chain multiple mac pros but that means buying 2 or more complete systems to have a multi CPU setup.

 
why is it that everytime someone posts a topic about apple, someone HAS to hate on a product in this case Mac Pro. Yes it will be expensive, but thats nothing fucking new. Can't we just enjoy the news instead of starting a Windows vs Mac flamewar saying which is better and cheaper..

Jeez.

On Topic:

Mac Pro looks crazy and im loving iOS 7 Beta currently on my iPhone 4, however missing some features(the dock is just solid grey, looks stupid) but other than that it pretty nice.
 
We are discussing the Mac Pro. Yes it looks crazy but if you look closer its actually quite disappointing from a pro standpoint. What is your opinion on it?
 
It's got some amazing features but since they made it so small, i think its gonna be hard to really do exactly what you want to do with it, ie upgrades etc.
 
Well yeah like most new apple products not being able to upgrade it I would think relegates it to the non professional market. No big company will want to pay that kind of money for a machine which will be irrelevant in less then a year with no way to upgrade. Look at what hp, dell or boxx are offering and yes it is similar today but you can do what you want to it after the initial purchase. To me this seems like apple have made a workstation for the rich general public not actually for the workplace.
 
Apple 'enthusiasts'. They can regurgitate a presentation/advertisement, but outside of that they're like a chicken with its head cut off.

On another note: iOS 7 actually looks quite appealing.
 
All the design companies I've worked with don't care, they toss out their workstations after a year.

Also they need the Mac Pro's to uphold their image against clients. (Not even joking, that's important in Euroland.)
 
I'm typing this response on a laptop I got in June of 2007. It does not work as well as the day I got it, but I can still use it to do everything I need to do. Last year I was running 1-2gb ski graphic files through photoshop and although it wasn't FAST, it never once crashed. It's still going strong and I still have close to three hours of battery life per charge, I've only replaced the battery once I think.

I will never go back to the ass-backwards UI and numerous problems of a windows machine again. I don't care what anyone says about stats. It's great that you know all these things about computers... bottom line is I don't have time to learn about how computers work, build computers, maintain computers, and waste time fine-tuning or fixing bugs when shit decides to act up.

I want a machine that works without me having to think about it. I now own this laptop, a 27 inch iMac that still gets me off after 2.5 years, and I'm buying a second imac for my business in the next few days. Straight up, they work. Plug them in, turn them on, do work. That's what I want, and that's the sort of person that mac products are valuable to. The extra 300 dollars I'm spending on a machine "with similar stats" is value that's made up to me very quickly.
 
friendly callout here twoods

BUT a windows computer is also plug in, do work. I got my desktop, i plugged it in, did work.

You dont necessarily have to build your own computer, tweak it and shit.

My windows computer was $1400 (plus $400 for monitors but thats not what were talking about, altho with an imac i guess you have one included, but who wants one monitor? ha)

a current imac, to the same stats that my computer is (actually not possible since i have a 6-core i7, but we'll go with highest i7 you can get) is 2800 dollars, literally twice as much. Granted, you get in my case $200 discount for having a monitor installed so its 1200 more, not just 300.

Now, this may not matter to you, which is fine. The lowest end imac is like what 1300? about the same price i paid for my computer. But, my computer will be 100x faster than that and i can upgrade it! you can even upgrade imac ram anymore. Again, twoods i know you dont give a shit about this, but im just saying in general.

If i could afford a $3k imac setup then id probably consider it, but after using a windows computer all winter, im set. Max OSX isn't even that great, its definitely no better than windows 7 ill tell you that. I literally have had zero problems in 8 months with my windows computer and now all i wanna do is build another one ha but that wont happen.

Anyways, the entire point im trying to make is that assuming imacs are the best is a fallacy, they're not the best and frankly at this point the only product ill ever spend a ridiculous amount of money on is a MBP. To this day i have yet to see a laptop that is as good as a MBP. One thing about MBP is you really only pay about 300-400 more for the same computer thats windows, so i feel ya on that. Windows laptops are trash and anyone who recommends a "nice" windows laptop will send you a link to a computer that cost $1500+.

So back to the point, its not a $300 difference, its more like a 1200 difference. I bet your brand new imac you buy, i could build a computer with the same stats for half the price, if not less, no doubty. /friendly callout
 
You can upgrade it, but just not without a $500-1000 thunderbolt expansion chassis. I can't stand expansion chassises, but any really serious user will fill 4 PCIe slots in a heartbeat. And on top of the expansion chassis inevitable glitches and annoyances, how do these things fit with expansion chassises for each machine on a rack?

Another thing - anyone think the GPU choice was a deliberate fuck you to Adobe?
 
I've never liked the comparison: I can build a PC for x amount and be cheaper off then an iMac.

The problem is you can't. Yes you can get the same components, but can you integrate them in a near silent enclosure no bigger then a 27 inch panel?

Also I can't look it up on mobile, but to my knowledge the 27 inch panel used in the iMac costs 900 euro when it comes in a screen from Dell.

As long as you don't go in the ridiculously expensive upgrades Apple offers I would say the iMac is decent value for money.
 
I mean, i can see why you want a sleek, efficient laptop, but with a desktop who gives a fuck? thats macs choice to use such an expensive screen which no doubt has a slight effect on the price, but still. I could care less if i have a tower on my desk or a 1inch thick imac.

And you kind of have to get all the expensive upgrade because you cant actually upgrade anything yourself, its fucked. Unless of course, you don't care, but for someone like me where fast cpu + high end gpu + fuck tons of ram = success, i like to have a high end system. But, thats just me.
 
I work in the uk and can assure you companies here don't just toss out upwards of 500 workstations every year. They have to get value for money and they have to be sustainable, which means the ability to upgrade. It's possibly differnt in a small design house which has 1 or2 machines and they want to look cutting edge to people who don't know any better but when working with clients who all make money from computers every day having a new shiny mac is not as important as having the fastest most up to date machine.
 
What people always seem to not mention is they still don't use all desktop components. Go configure one now its very limited. You can only have up to a quad core i7. 32gb of ram will cost an additional 450 pounds! You can only have 1 hard drive a. The big one they only use laptop graphics cards. So really all you get is a big importable laptop. I just configured an iMac and it ce out as 2500 pounds or about 4500 dollars. I then configured a hp z1 all in one and for the same money you can have a full on workstation.

So no I can not build an all in one, but companies like hp or dell can certainly build you a far better one for less money.

On a side note if you have not seen the hp z1 go have a look they are amazing. I was playing with one a few weeks ago and apple could learn a lot from it.
 
Adobe program's with cc opens it up so they can use any gpu. I actually see it more the other way round. Adobe and nvidia are in bed so adobe offer mac users the use of there software but nvidia won't offer the best gpu options to apple. It's like yes mac users you can use out software but you can't have the best hardware to run it.
 
Hp laptops and consumer models maybe but not there pro models. The z series workstations are some of the most regarded workstations available. Have you ever used one, as if you have had issues with a z series let me know.
 
Every HP computer that I or one of the people around me has bought, has broken within 1 year.

I know one guy that got the Z1. First one he got had a dead pixel. Sure, this happens, but the process to get it exchanged was ridiculous. The second one broke after 2 months. Had to replace network card and motherboard. And all this with piss poor support. Solid support can be priceless.
 
Cool interesting too know. I'd still personally take that over an apple u can't upgrade I think. I have been working on boxx and hp personally I'd go boxx but I was interested to know that more Hollywood films are made on hp then any other brand.
 
I can see that, but for most people a bog standard iMac will be plenty enough in terms of power, as you state that doesn't apply to you.

Also on the oh so subjective matter of design, some people pay 10 bucks for an ikea desk lamp and some pay 300 bucks for an Artemide light that will use the same bulb, it's definitely not 30 times better but some people still buy it just for the design alone. To you that design is now worth the premium and to others it can be. ;)

I don't have an iMac but a MacBook Pro because I need the mobility but I can see the appeal in the iMac for a certain large amount of people. It indeed might not be so good for real power-users like you.
 
Of course I didn't mean toss out, they sell them. And then buy the latest model every 1-1,5 years.The companies that did this had upwards of 100 workstations. Maybe that perception of image is more important in mainland Europe. ;)

I do need to mention that these are the kinds of design offices that spend even more on their Italian design furniture then computers. And for them and their pretentious image is apparently important. ;)
 
Yeah I think if its the type of place that buy supper expensive furniture then yeah they will be all over the Mac Pro. But the offices I see here are not open to the public and there image is less important. There you will see no macs. Well no the receptionist will have one and yeah I guess that is an image thing.
 
I've had to get motherboard replacements on a couple Z800s and Z820s at work, but aside from that those things fly. We're still running 7 or 8 Z800s from 2009. And they get run HARD.
 
I would switch to a computer like that in a heartbeat if it didn't mean having to use Windows. Really, my dislike of PC boils down to every Windows command requiring 3 more steps than it does on OSX.
 
As long as you are ok using keyboard shortcuts ill think you will find it pretty similar. But I don't use macs as often so I may be missing something. What things on Osx do you find much faster to do.
 
everyday stuff that is a pain on Windows:

- connecting to WiFi

- connecting to a network drive (why does it have to be so terrible on Windows?)

- ejecting a USB drive

- getting audio to stream wirelessly

- loading an email with outlook (how bad can an email client suck?)

- switching workspace, expose, and pretty much everything else that is accessed by a multitouch gesture

- setting up SSH

- connecting a projector / external display (the horror windows users go through when giving a presentation!!)

- changing your multiple display arrangement

- sharing an internet connection

- accessing a CD/DVD from another computer

- exporting stuff to PDF

- setting your default internet browser

- choosing default apps for file types

- getting a file from one computer to another over WiFi

- setting/calibrating the colors of your display

- quickly looking inside the contents of a file (quick look)

- getting POSIX-style shell access to your system (DOS-style is retarded)

- creating/mounting an image of a drive

- UI adapting to having one retina-resolution screen next to a standard-resolution screen

etc... etc...

Some of the most basic stuff is completely retarded on Windows, and just got 10x worse on Windows 8. Why in hell would you want to be forced to preview an image in full screen mode, then forcing you into tile mode, needing to push start and click desktop to get back to your shit.

And then the epitome of lousy UI design in Windows: WIZARDS. They are all over the place. Ugh.

Once you get accustomed to the likes of OSX or Ubuntu, it's rough to deal with Windows.
 
I honestly have never been bothered by any of the things you mentioned. Really if maybe one extra click bothers you then yeah stick with supper expensive hard ware. Most of that can be automated anyway. As long as you spend a little time saying up windows when you first use it you will not have to mess with it again. Wifi for example. Once you have connected once it will just connect automatically. Plug in a network drive it will just appear. To remove a drive you just right click eject. If you want multi screams just plug them in that's it. Setting default app is again just 1 right click. Like I said before if you don't know windows well yes it may be tedious but once you know the shortcuts it's super easy. Have you always been a mac guy? It takes time to adapt. When I use macs it takes me three rimes as long to do anything as I don't know what I'm doing as well I guess this may be most of your issue
 
Yup, I think this is why Mac users ITT have a hard time accepting Windows and vice versa. People get used to their system and then find how the other does it incredibly hard. I have a dual boot machine (granted I havent booted into windows in months) and both have their ups and downs.
 
Honestly, half of these things are fuck stupid.

I HATED windows.

Let me emphasis I HATED WINDOWS. I used windows XP for years and when i finally got a mbp and used OSX, i swore off windows for life.

Then I started using adobe, noticed how much money i could save on an editing desktop. I thought i'd never use it for anything but editing, but i find myself using my windows computer just as effortlessly and fluidly as my mbp. There are a couple VERY MINOR differences that literally aren't an issue for me.

Not having expose is whatever, i just used the "all windows" command but it doesnt even matter on windows, all of your windows are listed in the task bar and i have it on top, its nice.

I dunno, i think people that bitch about windows as an OS is just an excuse, I see no issue using windows. If you guys HAVE TO HAVE OSX then fine, im going to use windows and save thousands of dollars.
 
I use Windows 7 quite a bit for school, so I am totally comfortable with it and I find it pretty easy. Regardless, half the time I can't help but think about how half the tasks I do could be done in half the steps. It surprises me that they haven't made any improvement in that regard since I used XP as a personal computer when I was a kid.
 
I feel its a fairly valid thing to say. If you have used windows for over ten years you would know how to do the things you mentioned fast. Hell set up hot keys for them all if they annoy that much and you do them enough
 
LOL you are really funny!!!!

An everyday problem we come across at work every day: trying to access a network drive we have remotely set up on a web server. We have the same issue at home trying to access a NAS drive in our network.

On OSX you click Go > Connect to server and enter the URL to the drive. One second later you are connected as a guest. Click on "connect as..." to log in as admin or whatever.

On Windows (XP, 7 and 8) you have to go to My Computer, then Map Network Drive. So far so good. Then comes the ridiculous wizard window. You enter the address, click next. Then comes a pop up for a user name and password. But we want to log in as guest? Windows does not provide this option so you leave the username blank. 10% of the time this works. 90% of the time the username/password window

pops up again. At this point you can try 1000 times, Windows will refuse to connect to the network drive.

Riddle me this: how do I set up a hot key to solve this nonsense?

And you can come with arguments "set up a hot key" or "install this hack" all you want. They only further proves the point that Windows out of the box is a rotten turd.
 
296131_10151489595998737_909946401_n.jpg


 
Honestly sounds more like a hardware issue, but obviously you like macs, so thats fine mate, stick with it. Personally I like the ability to tweek things.

One last example, I was working on a project this week, which required 20GB Ram to open. I only had 16GB installed. So I go buy 16GB more for £50 and install it myself. Problem solved. If I was a mac user its not that easy. Personally I will put up with one or two more clicks if it means I can sort out the hardware issues myself.
 
Yeah it was a project in maya which had a ton of cached data, and also well over 4.5billion polygons, which is absurd. In Maya all that needs to be loaded into Ram, as obviously no GPU has the VRAM to handle that type of scene. It was very annoying, I would open the scene and slowly watch my RAM get eaten up until it was all gone and maya would crash. But as I say luckily with a windows machine it was an easy fix and I got an upgrade as a bonus.
 
That is alot of polygons, i dont know a ton about animation but i know thats alot haha
 
Yep. Its by far the most I have ever worked with. Its Bloody Fir trees, the scene has over 6000 fir trees(fir trees are really hi poly as you have to represent the needles, normal trees are relatively easy) Looks good though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top