The new Mac Pro coming later this year (take a look).

[pulpfiction007]

Think outside the square.

Anyone coming into this thread raving about windows is either a bit daft or a troll. I've been using Apple computers since the Apple IIc, I worked in tech support at Apple and I've done PC support. Mac OS has always been far easier and cheaper to support. When people look at the cost of computers they just don't factor in the support costs. Sure PCs are faster in certain areas but it's like the tortoise and the hare. The new mac pro is a hairy tortoise. It should be out just in time to cut my feature and I expect it will handle 2k Raw editing in FCPX with a thunderbolt raid array.

@ Surf it Mike. I't s#it easy, I was up and running on FCPX in a day and I didn't read any documentation. It's way better and faster than FCP7. A mate of mine just cut a feature in Premiere and said it was a pain in the arse, buggy. FCP 10.0.8 is rock solid.

No one's really been raving about windows..mainly seen a lot of Apple die hards insulting everybody who chooses to go another route. PCs are not all made equal...so unless you guys have used them ALL please stop the condescension...thanks.

 

[TheReverend]

CUDA works with a lot of high end professional products. Two of the big ones on the top of my head that I use myself are NukeX 7.0 and Maya. So yeah those are pretty big products that support CUDA gpu rendering. You can use the products but you lack performance without CUDA. Will The Foundry, and Autodesk re-code their products for the new Mac Pro? Hard to say but when production houses have so much invested in these products it seems pretty difficult to say "I'm going to invest in new systems and just let the software companies work it out." I think they will just because it is the new mac pro after all, but it also depends on how many customers buy them and request the software companies to change it. To me this still shows Apple wasn't able to work out a deal with nvidia and they should be listening to the industry instead of telling it what it needs. But at the same time Apple is taking a chance and it might work out this time, unlike, *cough*fcpx*cough*.

The difference between using CUDA or OpenGL isn't really re-writing software. It's more like optimization, allowing your program to talk with the hardware.

Incidentally, I went and did some checking. As far as Autodesk's website, they recommend ATI and Nvidia hardware, no CUDA necessary. So a bit of misinformation here. The list is currently Adobe Creative Suite, Resolve 9 (but not 10), and Nuke in it's current state. And even then, these could easily change with support of OpenCL, which all these softwares are likely to support sometime anyway.

 

[TheReverend]

In that article he states... "Would I use it again? yes, definitely. It's a very slick editing tool. Who knows whether it will catch on in the professional television sector and at the moment the signs aren't promising."
That is the truth. And where FCPX bit me the worst was when I was working for broadcasting studios. But I could go on and on about why it still falls way short of something like Avid. Even the writer in the article says after that quote something about Avid being so good. Well why would you settle for something less? So to answer your question if you are missing something I would say, yes you are if you are not on Avid MC6.5 or even the new Premiere Pro. I have both and like them a lot. Premiere if I am going to do some extensive AE work and MC6 for everything else.
So yeah, if and when I get the new Mac Pro, on goes MC6 and Premiere. FCPX has too many unstable problems and don't even get me started on trying to share projects or the amount of drive space they take up. Kiss cloud backups goodbye with that idea. Blah I will have to drink another shot of Jack just to calm down after even thinking about it.
The biggest reason I would not go to a PC is windows. I just can't handle it after all the years of using it.
Also keep in mind when people say macs are over priced, which I don't believe they are that much so, you will NEVER retain the value of a PC anywhere near the value holds on a mac. Try selling a PC for a fraction of the cost you payed for it just months after. I doubt it. You can sell the mac and regain a much larger chunk of your investment to use for a newer version. Oh and Apple care ftw.

Thanks for replying you definitely are giving me perspective on where you are coming from.

Avid Media Composer is fine. It's $1000 and FCPX is $299. And FCPX is a very fluid editing experience. After you learn it (you have to edit differently than you are used to), it's easy, quick, and painless.

FCPX has too many unstable problems and don't even get me started on trying to share projects or the amount of drive space they take up. Kiss cloud backups goodbye with that idea. Blah I will have to drink another shot of Jack just to calm down after even thinking about it.

FCPX has no stability issues. It did occasionally on 10.0.3 and prior. But that was a loooong time ago.
Sharing projects is easy if you learn how. We use FCPX on a NAS environment. Had 3 editors working today, all hooked up via Gigabit to NAS and editing.
Drive space being taken up? That is again an issue with learning the program. We run with no optimizing of media (converting to ProRes) and edit all day with no issues.

I'm sorry that you had a bad experience, but again I would contend that FCPX is a professional product. If you use it properly, it shines.

 

[Thomas Smet]

Now I can say this as a current Mac user and a FCPX as well as CS6 user. Those who think this machine will smoke similar PCs are feeding into that old Apple method of thinking their machine is faster than a similar PC just because. I may very well get one of these new Macs but in no way will they be faster than many other comparable PCs that will come out around the same time.

Some of you are forgetting that the core of any Apple computer is still an Intel CPU. In the case of the new MP it is only a single socket design. The new Intel CPUs can have up to 12 cores per CPU. There can also be a dual socket as well as a quad socket design. Yeah they may not be as cool but it will be easy to get equal performance on the PC side. Again not saying the new MP isn't amazing, because it is without a doubt amazing. What I am saying is at the end of the day we have to remember it will be the same Intel CPU and perhaps even the same AMD GPU used in other systems. In fact other systems with go even higher.

Part of the heat reduction on the new MP does come from their totally ingenious central heat sink and fan. The other part comes just from the fact that Intel finally has a single CPU with 12 cores. In the past this design could have only had 8 cores. So a big part of the processing power and low heat design does come from the single Intel CPU. A single socket system will generate a lot less power and heat than previous 12 core MP machines.

Engineering perfect is the new MP but I would not consider it the only option for that kind of performance. A PC workstation with the same new single 12 core CPU will have just as good of performance.

With that said I will hopefully get one since it is engineering perfection and I happen to like how CS6 works on OSX and I like to use FCPX. As an IOS developer as well I am committed to Apple systems so it makes sense for me to stay Mac. If the price is too high which I fear may be the case then I may just have to settle for a 27" iMac which is no slouch either.

And just think, in five years we will see benchmarks of a Mac Mini that beat this new MP. Amazing isn't it?

 

[TheReverend]

Like half as less. And no self respecting PC will look like that gizmo. Nope, just a rectangle with ports and fans vents - crazy!

PCs are NOT half as less. Possibly so if you build your own PC. But not if you actually buy your PC.

Example w Screen

iMac

If you buy smart off Newegg buying X brand, you can get as low as $850 for equivilent hardware as the base iMac which is $1300. So you save $450, but you also get x brand quality and warrenty, a big turd of a box, and you are stuck with Windows 8. And no web cam. And no speakers. And no wireless mouse/keyboard. And... Do you get it yet?

Yes PCs can be cheaper, especially so if you build, but it's really not such a thing to fuss about, honestly. You get a better quality product.

 

[starcentral]

PCIe flash @ 1250MB/s, holy ****

 

[Mike Harvey]

Uugh... I've tried to stay out of this thread... but...

If you buy smart off Newegg buying X brand, you can get as low as $850 for equivilent hardware as the base iMac which is $1300. So you save $450, but you also get x brand quality and warrenty, a big turd of a box,

I won't disagree about the big turd of a box, and I'm glad to see more PC makers adaoting the computer-and-moniter-in-one design like the iMac.

and you are stuck with Windows 8.

Unless you buy Windows 7 from Newegg... which still saves you money...

And no web cam.

Which I don't care about

And no speakers.

I would have bought upgraded speakers anyways, regardless of Mac or PC.

And no wireless mouse/keyboard.

Wireless mice are dirt cheap, and my keyboard never moves, so whether it's wireless or not is irrelevent to me.

Yes PCs can be cheaper, especially so if you build, but it's really not such a thing to fuss about, honestly. You get a better quality product.

I'm one of those who builds his own, and I don't begrudge anyone who feels that a Mac is worth the extra money. They are well built. But I use a Mac once or twice a week usually, and to be honest I have more issues with them than my Win7 home brew PC. I always have. The buggiest computer I ever used was an Avid Media someting or another (it was circa 1999, so I forget). It was a Mac. My experiance hasn't gotten better enough since then to justify the cost. If it has for you, more power to you. And I won't deny the new Mac Pro looks pretty darn slick. The quality of a Mac isn't high enough though to justify the extra expense for me, and some of the extras are simply of no concern to me.

But that's only me. YMMV.

 

[jdv]

PCs are NOT half as less. Possibly so if you build your own PC. But not if you actually buy your PC.

Example w Screen

iMac

If you buy smart off Newegg buying X brand, you can get as low as $850 for equivilent hardware as the base iMac which is $1300. So you save $450, but you also get x brand quality and warrenty, a big turd of a box, and you are stuck with Windows 8. And no web cam. And no speakers. And no wireless mouse/keyboard. And... Do you get it yet?

Yes PCs can be cheaper, especially so if you build, but it's really not such a thing to fuss about, honestly. You get a better quality product.

Truly, a webcam and computer speakers and everything? Golly!

I suppose that if you don't want to buy a computer because it's in a, "a big turd of a box," then that's your business. Personally, I don't care if it actually looks like a turd as long as it works.

Of course, a wireless keyboard is tempting.

 

[TheReverend]

Truly, a webcam and computer speakers and everything? Golly!

I suppose that if you don't want to buy a computer because it's in a, "a big turd of a box," then that's your business. Personally, I don't care if it actually looks like a turd as long as it works.

Of course, a wireless keyboard is tempting.

It very much is a personal taste thing. And my point is that an iMac has everything you need, period, in one box. And it's not 2x more expensive. It's like shopping at GAP instead of Walmart. You get what you pay for.

 

[TheReverend]

Uugh... I've tried to stay out of this thread... but...



I won't disagree about the big turd of a box, and I'm glad to see more PC makers adaoting the computer-and-moniter-in-one design like the iMac.



Unless you buy Windows 7 from Newegg... which still saves you money...



Which I don't care about



I would have bought upgraded speakers anyways, regardless of Mac or PC.



Wireless mice are dirt cheap, and my keyboard never moves, so whether it's wireless or not is irrelevent to me.



I'm one of those who builds his own, and I don't begrudge anyone who feels that a Mac is worth the extra money. They are well built. But I use a Mac once or twice a week usually, and to be honest I have more issues with them than my Win7 home brew PC. I always have. The buggiest computer I ever used was an Avid Media someting or another (it was circa 1999, so I forget). It was a Mac. My experiance hasn't gotten better enough since then to justify the cost. If it has for you, more power to you. And I won't deny the new Mac Pro looks pretty darn slick. The quality of a Mac isn't high enough though to justify the extra expense for me, and some of the extras are simply of no concern to me.

But that's only me. YMMV.

Mac's when properly cared for (like your home built PC) do just fine. They are well built and I whole-heartedly agree that building your own PC is the most affordable and best way to go for performance per dollar. Hell, I'm typing this on my Windows 8 home HTPC right now.

I just get tried of people berating Apple prices, when they honestly are quite fair for what you get. And Apple refurbs are such a good deal if you want a Mac and need to pinch the pennies. At my job, I've purchased like 10+ Macs from Apple refurb and macofalltrades over the past few years, not a problem from one.

 

[adkimery]

It very much is a personal taste thing. And my point is that an iMac has everything you need, period, in one box. And it's not 2x more expensive. It's like shopping at GAP instead of Walmart. You get what you pay for.

Who's "you"? Just because the iMac fits your needs doesn't mean it fits everyone else's needs. Walmart sells Apple products. Does the GAP?


-Andrew

 

[Zephyrnoid]

I tend not to make snap judgements so consider this a fist shot across the bow.
1) Love the indie friendly and sexy formfactor. I said indie friendly cause if its not rack-mountable I'm compelled to ask how it's supposed to play with other pro HW that's already on the rack?
2) Love the horsepower and concept of fast and furious. It brings back fond memories of my Old SGI running Flame at 500MIPS or faster.
3) Puzzled as to how/weather Apple/Ive have a storage roadmap in mind and how that will look? Should we envision a doughnut shaped RAID outer ring ala Haldron Collider?
4) I've always been very leery and unhappy with The Apple 'cube' thingy CPU and this reminds me of that.
Like I said. A cup-holder friendly machine is just the thing for Trust Fund Babies that wanna edit 4K in their cars

 

[Nitsuj]

I would say that by the time the MP ships there will be PC's available that are faster. I mean the HP Z820 is already showing 16 cores and before long there will be dual 12 cores and maybe even 16 cores. So yes if people the fastest there can be then it usually is the PC. I think it has always been that way. The reason I chose my macs is because they retain their value, the OS, great integration with all the other mac products, and apple care is pretty awesome too. All of those things, and more, combined just works better for me over the extra speed I may get. I'm sure Apple could try to stay on top of the most speed, most RAM, most storage list but that can't possibly be something any company can stay on top of. The only way they could get an edge like that would be to design and manufacture their own chips, RAM, drives, and other components. But that would cost way too much and might not even be successful. So it seems the best way to stay on the edge of this very fast race is to offer other perks along with the mac pro which include all I mentioned earlier. But in the future all it takes is a company to offer these things as well and put it in a neat package for them to stay on top. This makes me wonder if Apple is actually being innovative enough or is technology advancing so fast now that this sort of innovative thinking won't be enough. Really it would take something so much more radical and mind boggling to do what they did before. Like all fiber circuit boards, nano tech, or even biotechnological computers. It will happen in our lifetimes and even then when is enough just enough? I think the MP is cool but not "zomg that is alien technology" cool, though it looks like it with the cover off. There is no winner, just choices, and that is the best part.

EDIT: Yes I have typos, I'm in bed with my baby asleep on my chest.

 

[Nitsuj]

I tend not to make snap judgements so consider this a fist shot across the bow.
1) Love the indie friendly and sexy formfactor. I said indie friendly cause if its not rack-mountable I'm compelled to ask how it's supposed to play with other pro HW that's already on the rack?
2) Love the horsepower and concept of fast and furious. It brings back fond memories of my Old SGI running Flame at 500MIPS or faster.
3) Puzzled as to how/weather Apple/Ive have a storage roadmap in mind and how that will look? Should we envision a doughnut shaped RAID outer ring ala Haldron Collider?
4) I've always been very leery and unhappy with The Apple 'cube' thingy CPU and this reminds me of that.
Like I said. A cup-holder friendly machine is just the thing for Trust Fund Babies that wanna edit 4K in their cars

Haha made me chuckle. Nice.

 

[TheReverend]

Who's "you"? Just because the iMac fits your needs doesn't mean it fits everyone else's needs. Walmart sells Apple products. Does the GAP?


-Andrew

I dont mean "anything", i just meant perhiperals. Context makes this kind of obvious.

And Walmart sells iOS devices. Not Macs.

 

[squig]

Dad... where's my trust fund?... and my car?

An 8bay donut raid would be cool.

I wonder if it has holes in the bottom to draw in cool air? If not I might have to make some modifications.

Nitsuj ur radiating the baby!

 

[Mike Harvey]

...I just get tried of people berating Apple prices, when they honestly are quite fair for what you get.

I actually won't necessarily disagree with that. You do get what you pay for. I simply view it as the law of diminishing returns... I don't want to pay for it because I don't need/want the extra bump quality because it isn't worth it to me (even versus a well made prebuilt PC).

 

[Andrius Simutis]

Since we're rehashing the endless PC v Mac flamewar... resale value! PC's don't hold much value compared to Macs, so when you figure in resale value you're paying more in total for your PC.

 

[TheReverend]

I actually won't necessarily disagree with that. You do get what you pay for. I simply view it as the law of diminishing returns... I don't want to pay for it because I don't need/want the extra bump quality because it isn't worth it to me (even versus a well made prebuilt PC).

Agreed completely. I honestly don't care about "everyone getting a Mac" or "Apple's only way-to-go" and the like. That's Narrow minded. It's the haters that spew disinformation and spread opinions as fact that gets me riled.

Macs are a great solution for some and not for others. And that's ok.

 

[Andrew Gupta]

People who get too excited over company press releases make me suspicious.

Once this Mac has hit the streets and turns out to be the greatest thing since the invention of the hooker – then tell me about it. Until then – everything anyone writes is pure opinion based on pure speculation.

The fact is that for the past decade a well equipped PC bests any upper end Mac at usually about half the price. From a business perspective – the only thing I need to know is if this new round gizmo changes that – and there's no valid answer to that question until the round gizmos hit the streets.