Discussion Forums > Technology

Apple releases new... everything

<< < (35/53) > >>

iindigo:
So far this is sounding like it's more Intel's fault than anybody else's.

I'd like to ask: What do YOU think Apple should have done with the latest Mac Pro update? I don't think switching from Xeons to i7's would have been a viable choice - not because the i7 is less capable, but because the i7 is considered a "consumer" chip (thus devaluing the machine for some less-informed customers) and because i7 doesn't do ECC, which is required in some higher-end fields.

Pigeon:

--- Quote from: iindigo on May 23, 2009, 04:39:33 PM ---I don't think switching from Xeons to i7's would have been a viable choice - not because the i7 is less capable, but because the i7 is considered a "consumer" chip (thus devaluing the machine for some less-informed customers)
--- End quote ---
This is why engineering and accounting departments are supposed to be independent of the marketing departments. Because some asshat with a communications degree and a really great fashion sense is going to decide it's better to have a really expensive computer than a cheap computer, even though performance and profits are exactly the same.

And no, really, it's Apple's fault, not Intel's. Intel released a perfectly viable high performance chipset and CPU - the i7 - and Apple decided, "No thanks, we'd rather overpay for the exact same performance." And they did. And now Apple fanboys who want a computer that's worth $1000 in PC land have to pay $2500.
--- Quote from: iindigo on May 23, 2009, 11:30:33 AM ---I have no doubt your system is comparable to a Mac Pro in performance, but if you're going to compare, at least use the same or similarly-priced components. [...] it's necessary if you want to do a comparison between a homebuilt or prebuilt Windows PC and Mac Pro.
--- End quote ---
That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. I'm saying I can get product Y, which is 250MHz, 4GB of RAM, 360GB of hard disk space better, (video card's better too, but unquantifiable) for significantly less money, and you're saying, "well, no, it's not an accurate comparison to product X because you didn't get bent over a rail and fucked in the ass by Steve Jobs." Well, I say: I don't want to get fucked in the ass by Steve jobs. Or anyone else.

Apple needs a midrange desktop. Period. They're missing out on anyway who wants to play the latest games - the iMac doesn't cut it, and the Mac Pro is too expensive. There are plenty of people who don't want to use Windows as a desktop OS but still want to play Crysis - Apple is missing out on that share of the market.

iindigo:
And what of people that need ECC? Apple can't ignore those customers,  and you seemed to have cut that out of my post.

Pigeon:

--- Quote from: iindigo on May 23, 2009, 06:45:11 PM ---And what of people that need ECC? Apple can't ignore those customers,  and you seemed to have cut that out of my post.
--- End quote ---
People who need ECC are better served by a rackmount solution running an actual server OS.

Apple going after those customers is about as silly as General Motors building power plants.

sdedalus83:
They needed a custom commissioned motherboard either way.  Rather than cutting costs with a modular design which did away with the costly second socket, two dimms per socket, and costly third memory channel, they should have implemented all the features available on any consumer level board, along with the extra workstation features like ecc support.  That way the customers who bought a single cpu system could drop another one in when it becomes necessary, and their high end customers would have systems that aren't crippled compared to near future i7 xeon workstations.  As it is now, once Intel turns their focus away from winning the HPC and high end server markets back, the rest of the workstation market will have fully functional systems.  12 dimms and triple channel memory might not mean much while they are the only company making dual socket i7 systems, but it will be huge in the near future.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page