POST A COMMENT

19 Comments

Back to Article

  • AmdInside - Tuesday, June 12, 2012 - link

    Apple did not want to waste resources on redesigning the Mac Pro if the end of the world was going to occur in 2012. I still long for a Mac Mini like system with room for two 3.5" hard drives. Reply
  • name99 - Tuesday, June 12, 2012 - link

    "Note that there haven't been any announcements made regarding the next iMac."

    Maybe no-one cares, but the Ivy Bridge mac mini also hasn't been announced.

    Personally I think there's no great mystery here. Apple (unlike some other tech companies) is well aware of the value of releasing new info in small doses. Announce new MacBooks AND new iMacs AND new iPhones on one day, and you get one day of publicity.
    Announce the iMacs separately (with the mac mini as a minor side issue, same as the Mac Pro boost yesterday); then the iPhone on yet another day, and you get three days of publicity.

    The relevance to the previous comment is that a mac mini with USB3 would basically give you want you want, in that there would be much less speed penalty for just using an external USB3 drive.
    Yes, it's not ideal. Unless the geniuses controlling USB3 have made a change I'm unaware of, USB3 just like USB2, does not transfer fancy commands like SMART or TRIM (or even NCQ?) over USB, so it's not ideal. But it's better than nothing.

    The other solution, of course, would be a TB drive which, in theory, SHOULD be just like an internal drive. Of course you will pay for that privilege...

    Point is --- Apple designs something that works well for most people, and can be made to work adequately for almost anyone. They are NOT going to design something that is optimized for a minuscule segment of the population, like two internal drives.
    Reply
  • Exodite - Wednesday, June 13, 2012 - link

    Google UAS/UASP.

    Regardless, USB 3 is perfectly fine for a couple of external 3.5" drives. Aside from price it also has the advantage of being compatible with non-Mac computers.
    Reply
  • ddarko - Tuesday, June 12, 2012 - link

    I'll refrain from speculating about why Apple is waiting until next year for something really great. I do hope it has to do with Haswell though.


    At least for the Mac Pro, maybe the delay is because Apple is engineering a solution to pairing Thunderbolt with add-on graphics card that doesn't involve clunky pass through cable like this Asus motherboard that Anandtech previewed:

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/5935/asus-thunderbol...

    As Arstechnica noted in its article about the Mac Pro update before WWDC, Thunderbolt has to also carry the video signal:

    The complicating issue is that Thunderbolt not only carries high-speed PCIe data, but must also carry DisplayPort video as well. On all other Macs, GPUs—whether integrated or discrete—are fixed. This makes it easy to pipe the DisplayPort output to the Thunderbolt port, which serves as both a high-speed interconnect as well as the connection for an external monitor. The Mac Pro, on the other hand, has removable PCIe-based graphics cards. How will Apple get the output of these cards into the Thunderbolt controller?

    The most likely solution is a Mini DisplayPort passthrough cable. ASUS is using an external DisplayPort cable to add Thunderbolt to its latest motherboard designs, but that seems decidedly "un-Apple-like." There may be a more elegant solution in the works, such as directing the card's output over the PCIe bus directly to the Thunderbolt controller, but according to our sources, no current graphics cards work that way. Given that reality, we think Apple will use an internal cable combined with GPUs featuring an internal mini-DP connector.


    http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/06/what-should-t...

    Ars labeled is an un-Apple-like solution but thought Apple was willing to make the trade to get new Mac Pros with Thunderbolt out the door. I think Apple wasn't willing to make the tradeoff and is waiting for a better solution.
    Reply
  • retrospooty - Tuesday, June 12, 2012 - link

    "least for the Mac Pro, maybe the delay is because Apple is engineering a solution to pairing Thunderbolt with add-on graphics card that doesn't involve clunky pass through cable like this Asus motherboard that Anandtech previewed:" Reply
  • retrospooty - Tuesday, June 12, 2012 - link

    "least for the Mac Pro, maybe the delay is because Apple is engineering a solution to pairing Thunderbolt with add-on graphics card that doesn't involve clunky pass through cable like this Asus motherboard that Anandtech previewed:"

    The benefit being what? I cant imagine anything like this being useful outside of niches.
    Reply
  • ddarko - Tuesday, June 12, 2012 - link

    The benefit is that it isn't ugly. I think that's enough for Apple.

    I would clarify that Arstechnica speculated about an internal pass through cable, not an external solution like the one Asus is offering. But even an internal one would mess up the clean lines of the Mac Pro internals.
    Reply
  • StevoLincolnite - Wednesday, June 13, 2012 - link

    I would think the last machine that would need thunderport was the Mac Pro, it's a fairly largish ugly case, so you should be able to upgrade it all easily anyway. (Video cards, drives etc'.) Reply
  • retrospooty - Wednesday, June 13, 2012 - link

    I dont mean the benefit of using a passthrough cable vs. not, I mean what is the benefit of using thunderbolt display vs. already existing display standards that already dont need a passthrough cable. Why would Apple go through the trouble to design that in, what is the market?

    Not trolling here, its a genuine question.
    Reply
  • Wicked1 - Wednesday, June 13, 2012 - link

    OMG!

    Only a Mac fanatic would worry abut the "Clean lines of the Mac Pro internals" over the utility of the system. (I have a Mac Pro - early 2009).

    So tell me, is your Mac Pro sitting up on your desk with the side panel removed so everyone can see how "Clean" the internals are????

    Too bizarre for words.
    Reply
  • ddarko - Wednesday, June 13, 2012 - link

    It's Apple who cares about the internal cleanliness of the Mac Pro - I think they even talk about it on the Mac Pro product page. The entire point of my point was to say why Apple, not me, might have delayed refreshing the Mac Pro. Apple cares about aesthetics.

    And I'm baffled why you think a concern about the internals of a case is limited to Apple. Man high end PC boutiques make a point of advertising how clean their wiring inside the case is. It's also a concern for many DIY builders. And FYI, I don't know a Mac - my PC siting on the floor is a Lian Li case with parts put together myself. Perhaps you might learn to stop making assumptions and post something useful next time.
    Reply
  • slashbinslashbash - Tuesday, June 12, 2012 - link

    Isn't the "must" part of "must also carry DisplayPort video" a little overstated? You can have an active Thunderbolt cable that isn't carrying video data.

    The usage scenarios for Mac Pros are different vs. laptops. A Mac Pro is a big machine that sits in one place. An external monitor is a requirement, not an option. Consolidating the cables might be nice from an aesthetic point of view, but it's not an imperative like with laptops (especially MBA/Ultrabooks). Apple just needs to add Thunderbolt to the Mac Pro motherboards for stuff like external HDD's and whatever other Thunderbolt peripherals come out. Connecting to a monitor can be handled through the GPU like usual, whether by Thunderbolt, DisplayPort, HDMI, DVI, or VGA. But in general, Thunderbolt is less useful for the desktop than for the laptop -- there is no need for external GPUs, etc. when you've already got a few PCIe slots available internally.
    Reply
  • martinw - Tuesday, June 12, 2012 - link

    It's unlikely to be Haswell. The dual socket Xeon parts typically come out a year after the initial parts are lauched. Haswell is early next year, so the Xeon Haswells will likely be early 2014. Reply
  • ddarko - Tuesday, June 12, 2012 - link

    Haswell is unlikely for the Mac Pro but may be appropriate for the iMac. It still seems odd to think Apple would skip Ivy Bridge for the iMac while waiting for Haswell. Apple did take five months after Intel launched Sandy Bridge to move the iMac line to it so there is precedent for Apple taking its time - it's still within that five month window since Ivy Bridge launched in April. Apple also refreshed its iMac right before the holiday season back in October 2009 so perhaps it'll combine both the 5-month wait and a late year holiday launch and introducing Ivy Bridge iMacs in October 2012.

    And in fact, Macrumors is now reporting that Apple PR has clarified that reports that it said both the Mac Pro and iMac would likely be refreshed in 2013 only applied to the Mac Pro and not the iMac. So I think we can expect Ivy Bridge iMacs in autumn 2012.

    http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/apple-spokespe...
    Reply
  • name99 - Tuesday, June 12, 2012 - link

    Well duh. Only an idiot would think there won't be an Ivy Bridge iMac, and soon. Reply
  • ddarko - Wednesday, June 13, 2012 - link

    It wasn't so obvious because the initial reporting by NYT's David Pogue and Forbes said they were told by an Apple executive and Apple PR, respectively, that both the Mac Pro and iMac would be updated in 2013. That caused some confusion and consternation which has since been clarified. Reply
  • JMS3072 - Wednesday, June 13, 2012 - link

    I honestly don't see the point of Ivy Bridge for the iMac- they all have dedicated graphics anyway, and graphics performance is the only real advantage that Ivy has over Sandy for the desktop set. We'll see a refresh, but it'll be on AMD/NVidia's schedule- not Intel's. Reply
  • retrospooty - Wednesday, June 13, 2012 - link

    " honestly don't see the point of Ivy Bridge for the iMac- they all have dedicated graphics anyway, and graphics performance is the only real advantage that Ivy has over Sandy for the desktop set"

    It's inevitable anyhow. Once production is fully ramped up the chips are cheaper for Intel to make, so that is primarily what will be available.

    For the OEM's like Apple...Although only slightly faster and slightly better with power, its 100% pin compatible, so no redesign is needed. Just pop in the new CPU and you have a new SKU. Better to have it than to not have it since its a no-brainer to implement ,a bit faster and a bit more efficient... There is no downside.
    Reply
  • owned66 - Wednesday, June 13, 2012 - link

    if u already own an older mac
    just remove the innards
    install a gigabyte board and an intel cpu of ur liking
    and then go to tonymacx86
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now