15 New Messages
Digest #9601
Messages
Thu Jun 13, 2013 7:33 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Denver Dan" denverdan22180
Howdy.
I think there's more TB stuff than you may realize, Otto.
Check this link at OWC for their page of Thunderbolt devices.
<http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/Thunderbolt/ >
Denver Dan
On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 00:36:58 +0100, Otto Nikolaus wrote:
> Same here. The only use I've found for TB on my MBP is to use it for HDMI
> with an adaptor. Of course, there should be an HDMI port anyway, but you
> only get that on the Retina and the Retina lacks other useful stuff like an
> optical drive.
>
> I didn't mind paying a few £ extra for an external drive that had FW as
> well as USB 2, but I'm not aware of anything at sensible prices that has
> TB, so the future looks like USB 3.
>
> Otto
I think there's more TB stuff than you may realize, Otto.
Check this link at OWC for their page of Thunderbolt devices.
<http://eshop.
Denver Dan
On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 00:36:58 +0100, Otto Nikolaus wrote:
> Same here. The only use I've found for TB on my MBP is to use it for HDMI
> with an adaptor. Of course, there should be an HDMI port anyway, but you
> only get that on the Retina and the Retina lacks other useful stuff like an
> optical drive.
>
> I didn't mind paying a few £ extra for an external drive that had FW as
> well as USB 2, but I'm not aware of anything at sensible prices that has
> TB, so the future looks like USB 3.
>
> Otto
Thu Jun 13, 2013 7:36 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Denver Dan" denverdan22180
Howdy.
The semi accurate article is written in such a gobbledegook of dense
acronyms and tech jargon that it is incomprehensible.
On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 22:24:16 -0400, Charles Carroll wrote:
>
http://semiaccurate.com/2013/04/10/thunderbolt-still-broken-but-new-parts-talked-up/
>
> http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7117
> On Jun 13, 2013 10:49 AM, "TimeFramePhoto" <macdane@mac.com > wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> While it's great to see new Thunderbolt products trickling into the
>> marketplace, I remain concerned at their continued high prices and relative
>> scarcity.
The semi accurate article is written in such a gobbledegook of dense
acronyms and tech jargon that it is incomprehensible.
On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 22:24:16 -0400, Charles Carroll wrote:
>
http://semiaccurate
>
> http://semiaccurate
> On Jun 13, 2013 10:49 AM, "TimeFramePhot
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> While it's great to see new Thunderbolt products trickling into the
>> marketplace, I remain concerned at their continued high prices and relative
>> scarcity.
Thu Jun 13, 2013 7:49 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Charles Carroll" charlesmarkcarroll
The gist of their coverage has been that Intel has made Thunderbolt chips
very expensive so cheap hubs are hard to make with 2 $30 chips required for
most hubs.
and that on the high end all their high end speeds are lies in reality and
that the optical stuff is insanely expensive and cannot have long cables.
The new AMD Dock Port seems to deliver higher than thunderbolt speed and
requires $2 chips instead so it is a more promising standard for next
decade.
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Denver Dan <denver.dan@verizon.net > wrote:
> **
>
>
> Howdy.
>
> The semi accurate article is written in such a gobbledegook of dense
> acronyms and tech jargon that it is incomprehensible.
>
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 22:24:16 -0400, Charles Carroll wrote:
> >
>
> http://semiaccurate.com/2013/04/10/thunderbolt-still-broken-but-new-parts-talked-up/
> >
> > http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7117
> > On Jun 13, 2013 10:49 AM, "TimeFramePhoto" <macdane@mac.com > wrote:
> >
> >> **
>
> >>
> >>
> >> While it's great to see new Thunderbolt products trickling into the
> >> marketplace, I remain concerned at their continued high prices and
> relative
> >> scarcity.
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
very expensive so cheap hubs are hard to make with 2 $30 chips required for
most hubs.
and that on the high end all their high end speeds are lies in reality and
that the optical stuff is insanely expensive and cannot have long cables.
The new AMD Dock Port seems to deliver higher than thunderbolt speed and
requires $2 chips instead so it is a more promising standard for next
decade.
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Denver Dan <denver.dan@verizon.
> **
>
>
> Howdy.
>
> The semi accurate article is written in such a gobbledegook of dense
> acronyms and tech jargon that it is incomprehensible.
>
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 22:24:16 -0400, Charles Carroll wrote:
> >
>
> http://semiaccurate
> >
> > http://semiaccurate
> > On Jun 13, 2013 10:49 AM, "TimeFramePhot
> >
> >> **
>
> >>
> >>
> >> While it's great to see new Thunderbolt products trickling into the
> >> marketplace, I remain concerned at their continued high prices and
> relative
> >> scarcity.
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Thu Jun 13, 2013 7:51 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Jim Saklad" jimdoc01
> I think FireWire was originally developed jointly by Apple and Texas
> Instruments.
Wiki:
> FireWire is Apple's name for the IEEE 1394 High Speed Serial Bus. It was initiated by Apple (in 1986) and developed by the IEEE P1394 Working Group, largely driven by contributions from Apple, although major contributions were also made by engineers from Texas Instruments, Sony, Digital Equipment Corporation, IBM, and INMOS/SGS Thomson (now STMicroelectronics).
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.com
> Instruments.
Wiki:
> FireWire is Apple's name for the IEEE 1394 High Speed Serial Bus. It was initiated by Apple (in 1986) and developed by the IEEE P1394 Working Group, largely driven by contributions from Apple, although major contributions were also made by engineers from Texas Instruments, Sony, Digital Equipment Corporation, IBM, and INMOS/SGS Thomson (now STMicroelectronics)
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.
Thu Jun 13, 2013 10:29 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"TimeFramePhoto"
On Jun 13, 2013, at 9:36 PM, David Brostoff wrote:
> On Jun 13, 2013, at 16:16 , TimeFramePhoto <macdane@mac.com > wrote:
>
>> In my experience, it hasn't, which is sort of my complaint. I've had TB on the last 2-3 Macs I've purchased but have never been able to justify the expense of trying to buy stuff that plugs into them!
>
> Also, I keep reading that few external hard drives can saturate FireWire 800, let alone Thunderbolt. So what kind of applications can take advantage of it?
Yes, from what I've read it would be a little silly to spring for a TB enclosure for use with spinning disk drives as they simply can't take advantage of TB's speed. For that, USB3 and FW800 are plenty. As far as data storage and transfer, I'd be interested in a portable SSD drive using TB, but there are very few out there, and pricy + pricy = really pricy. As in $500 for a 240GB drive. No thanks.
As a photographer, I'd also be extremely interested in a reasonably priced TB reader for my CompactFlash cards. One of my cameras generates RAW files on the order of 50MB per click...that adds up in a hurry and it would be great to be able to move that data from card to Mac quickly, but no such thing exists. That's just adding insult to injury because nobody even makes FW card readers anymore.
So while I'm sure there are plenty of others, those are two applications of TB that would really help me out.
Dane
> On Jun 13, 2013, at 16:16 , TimeFramePhoto <macdane@mac.
>
>> In my experience, it hasn't, which is sort of my complaint. I've had TB on the last 2-3 Macs I've purchased but have never been able to justify the expense of trying to buy stuff that plugs into them!
>
> Also, I keep reading that few external hard drives can saturate FireWire 800, let alone Thunderbolt. So what kind of applications can take advantage of it?
Yes, from what I've read it would be a little silly to spring for a TB enclosure for use with spinning disk drives as they simply can't take advantage of TB's speed. For that, USB3 and FW800 are plenty. As far as data storage and transfer, I'd be interested in a portable SSD drive using TB, but there are very few out there, and pricy + pricy = really pricy. As in $500 for a 240GB drive. No thanks.
As a photographer, I'd also be extremely interested in a reasonably priced TB reader for my CompactFlash cards. One of my cameras generates RAW files on the order of 50MB per click...that adds up in a hurry and it would be great to be able to move that data from card to Mac quickly, but no such thing exists. That's just adding insult to injury because nobody even makes FW card readers anymore.
So while I'm sure there are plenty of others, those are two applications of TB that would really help me out.
Dane
Thu Jun 13, 2013 10:35 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"TimeFramePhoto"
But there are three problems there, DD. First, most of those products are simply adapters. Second, they're prohibitively expensive. Even the adapters add, in many cases, several hundreds of dollars to whatever solution one tries to cobble together. And third, regardless of price, that's still not much of an array of options for a supposedly amazing technology that's been around for two years. In the "will it or will it not catch on" game, the writing on the wall thus far is that it has failed. I hope that changes, but I sadly see no reason to think it will.
Dane
On Jun 13, 2013, at 10:33 PM, Denver Dan wrote:
> Howdy.
>
> I think there's more TB stuff than you may realize, Otto.
>
> Check this link at OWC for their page of Thunderbolt devices.
>
> <http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/Thunderbolt/ >
>
> Denver Dan
>
>
> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 00:36:58 +0100, Otto Nikolaus wrote:
>> Same here. The only use I've found for TB on my MBP is to use it for HDMI
>> with an adaptor. Of course, there should be an HDMI port anyway, but you
>> only get that on the Retina and the Retina lacks other useful stuff like an
>> optical drive.
>>
>> I didn't mind paying a few £ extra for an external drive that had FW as
>> well as USB 2, but I'm not aware of anything at sensible prices that has
>> TB, so the future looks like USB 3.
>>
>> Otto
Dane
On Jun 13, 2013, at 10:33 PM, Denver Dan wrote:
> Howdy.
>
> I think there's more TB stuff than you may realize, Otto.
>
> Check this link at OWC for their page of Thunderbolt devices.
>
> <http://eshop.
>
> Denver Dan
>
>
> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 00:36:58 +0100, Otto Nikolaus wrote:
>> Same here. The only use I've found for TB on my MBP is to use it for HDMI
>> with an adaptor. Of course, there should be an HDMI port anyway, but you
>> only get that on the Retina and the Retina lacks other useful stuff like an
>> optical drive.
>>
>> I didn't mind paying a few £ extra for an external drive that had FW as
>> well as USB 2, but I'm not aware of anything at sensible prices that has
>> TB, so the future looks like USB 3.
>>
>> Otto
Fri Jun 14, 2013 2:53 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Chris Jones" bobstermcbob
On 14/06/13 06:29, TimeFramePhoto wrote:
> On Jun 13, 2013, at 9:36 PM, David Brostoff wrote:
>
>> On Jun 13, 2013, at 16:16 , TimeFramePhoto <macdane@mac.
>>
>>> In my experience, it hasn't, which is sort of my complaint. I've had TB on the last 2-3 Macs I've purchased but have never been able to justify the expense of trying to buy stuff that plugs into them!
>>
>> Also, I keep reading that few external hard drives can saturate FireWire 800, let alone Thunderbolt. So what kind of applications can take advantage of it?
>
> Yes, from what I've read it would be a little silly to spring for a TB enclosure for use with spinning disk drives as they simply can't take advantage of TB's speed. For that, USB3 and FW800 are plenty. As far as data storage and transfer, I'd be interested in a portable SSD drive using TB, but there are very few out there, and pricy + pricy = really pricy. As in $500 for a 240GB drive. No thanks.
Its not just a matter of if a *single* device can saturate a TB
connection. In fact, this is exactly what you don't want as it would
then mean once you start daisy chaining devices together, which is one
of the main benefits of TB, you would start to loose performance. The TB
connection has to be faster than any single device can handle, so it
doesn't become the weak link in the chain...
> As a photographer, I'd also be extremely interested in a reasonably priced TB reader for my CompactFlash cards. One of my cameras generates RAW files on the order of 50MB per click...that adds up in a hurry and it would be great to be able to move that data from card to Mac quickly, but no such thing exists. That's just adding insult to injury because nobody even makes FW card readers anymore.
>
> So while I'm sure there are plenty of others, those are two applications of TB that would really help me out.
>
> Dane
>
> ------------
>
> Group FAQ:
> <http://www.macsuppo
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:48 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Otto Nikolaus" nikyzf
Not at sensible prices, which was my point. ;)
Otto
On 14 June 2013 03:33, Denver Dan <denver.dan@verizon.net > wrote:
> Howdy.
>
> I think there's more TB stuff than you may realize, Otto.
>
> Check this link at OWC for their page of Thunderbolt devices.
>
> <http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/Thunderbolt/ >
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Otto
On 14 June 2013 03:33, Denver Dan <denver.dan@verizon.
> Howdy.
>
> I think there's more TB stuff than you may realize, Otto.
>
> Check this link at OWC for their page of Thunderbolt devices.
>
> <http://eshop.
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Fri Jun 14, 2013 4:10 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Otto Nikolaus" nikyzf
On 14 June 2013 06:29, TimeFramePhoto <macdane@mac.com > wrote:
>
> Yes, from what I've read it would be a little silly to spring for a TB
> enclosure for use with spinning disk drives as they simply can't take
> advantage of TB's speed. For that, USB3 and FW800 are plenty. As far as
> data storage and transfer, I'd be interested in a portable SSD drive using
> TB, but there are very few out there, and pricy + pricy = really pricy. As
> in $500 for a 240GB drive. No thanks.
>
> As a photographer, I'd also be extremely interested in a reasonably priced
> TB reader for my CompactFlash cards. One of my cameras generates RAW files
> on the order of 50MB per click...that adds up in a hurry and it would be
> great to be able to move that data from card to Mac quickly, but no such
> thing exists. That's just adding insult to injury because nobody even makes
> FW card readers anymore.
>
> So while I'm sure there are plenty of others, those are two applications
> of TB that would really help me out.
>
But how fast are the fastest CF cards? 1000x? That's 150 MB/s or 1200 Mb/s.
USB 3 is easily fast enough.
Otto
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> Yes, from what I've read it would be a little silly to spring for a TB
> enclosure for use with spinning disk drives as they simply can't take
> advantage of TB's speed. For that, USB3 and FW800 are plenty. As far as
> data storage and transfer, I'd be interested in a portable SSD drive using
> TB, but there are very few out there, and pricy + pricy = really pricy. As
> in $500 for a 240GB drive. No thanks.
>
> As a photographer, I'd also be extremely interested in a reasonably priced
> TB reader for my CompactFlash cards. One of my cameras generates RAW files
> on the order of 50MB per click...that adds up in a hurry and it would be
> great to be able to move that data from card to Mac quickly, but no such
> thing exists. That's just adding insult to injury because nobody even makes
> FW card readers anymore.
>
> So while I'm sure there are plenty of others, those are two applications
> of TB that would really help me out.
>
But how fast are the fastest CF cards? 1000x? That's 150 MB/s or 1200 Mb/s.
USB 3 is easily fast enough.
Otto
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Thu Jun 13, 2013 7:57 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Jim Saklad" jimdoc01
> Well, having upgraded to 6.3, I have apparently also done something that seems to have bricked my Airport Extreme Base Station.
>
> Airport Utility on my MBPro simply no longer can find it.
I have a Time Capsule that I wasn't using, so I was able to re-create my wireless network, and Airport Utility *shows* a ghosted-out Dual-Band Airport Extreme Base Station as well as the Time Capsule, but when I click on the former, I get:
"Device Not Found
Dual-Band Airport Extreme was previously part of your network.
Check that it is still in range of your network and is plugged into a power outlet.
Click Forget to remove this base station from this network."
Needless to say, it *is* still in range and plugged in.
I don't know if I would be able to re-discover it if I click Forget, and I have no other ideas on how to re-discover it.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.com
>
> Airport Utility on my MBPro simply no longer can find it.
I have a Time Capsule that I wasn't using, so I was able to re-create my wireless network, and Airport Utility *shows* a ghosted-out Dual-Band Airport Extreme Base Station as well as the Time Capsule, but when I click on the former, I get:
"Device Not Found
Dual-Band Airport Extreme was previously part of your network.
Check that it is still in range of your network and is plugged into a power outlet.
Click Forget to remove this base station from this network."
Needless to say, it *is* still in range and plugged in.
I don't know if I would be able to re-discover it if I click Forget, and I have no other ideas on how to re-discover it.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.
Thu Jun 13, 2013 8:47 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Pat Taylor" pat412255
Sent from my iPad...î…
On Jun 13, 2013, at 8:12 PM, Jim Saklad <jimdoc@icloud.
> > If the discussion group over at Apple is correct, the functionality of the
> > Airport Utility was changed in version 6.3. It now seems to require IPv6.
> > If a Mac has IPv6 turned off, then Airport Utility v6.3 cannot connect to
> > an AirPort base station.
> > The affected IPv6 setting is located in the Network preference pane. In
> > Advanced Settings, TCP/IP tab. The label is: "Configure IPv6". If it is set
> > to off, change it to something else, "Link-Local only" is recommended, if
> > it was set to "Off"
> > This worked for me, so I am thinking the discussion group may be on to
> > something.
> > If anyone is interested in reading the discussion on the problem, here is a
> > link:
> >
> > https://discussions
>
> Well, having upgraded to 6.3, I have apparently also done something that seems to have bricked my Airport Extreme Base Station.
>
> Airport Utility on my MBPro simply no longer can find it.
>
The same thing happened to mine, but following the above tip for changing the iPv6 setting fixed it.
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Thu Jun 13, 2013 8:58 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Jim Saklad" jimdoc01
>> Well, having upgraded to 6.3, I have apparently also done something that seems to have bricked my Airport Extreme Base Station.
>>
>> Airport Utility on my MBPro simply no longer can find it.
>
> The same thing happened to mine, but following the above tip for changing the iPv6 setting fixed it.
My problem was *triggered* by changing the IPv6 setting from "Automatically" TO "Link-local only".
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.com
>>
>> Airport Utility on my MBPro simply no longer can find it.
>
> The same thing happened to mine, but following the above tip for changing the iPv6 setting fixed it.
My problem was *triggered* by changing the IPv6 setting from "Automatically
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.
Thu Jun 13, 2013 9:36 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Jon Kreisler" jonkreisler
It appears the problem with AirPort Utility 6.3 may be more complex. Apple
is definitely aware of some of the problems. I guess we may have to wait
for Apple to do something.
Jon
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Jim Saklad <jimdoc@icloud.com > wrote:
> **
>
>
> >> Well, having upgraded to 6.3, I have apparently also done something
> that seems to have bricked my Airport Extreme Base Station.
> >>
> >> Airport Utility on my MBPro simply no longer can find it.
> >
> > The same thing happened to mine, but following the above tip for
> changing the iPv6 setting fixed it.
>
> My problem was *triggered* by changing the IPv6 setting from
> "Automatically" TO "Link-local only".
>
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.com
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
is definitely aware of some of the problems. I guess we may have to wait
for Apple to do something.
Jon
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Jim Saklad <jimdoc@icloud.
> **
>
>
> >> Well, having upgraded to 6.3, I have apparently also done something
> that seems to have bricked my Airport Extreme Base Station.
> >>
> >> Airport Utility on my MBPro simply no longer can find it.
> >
> > The same thing happened to mine, but following the above tip for
> changing the iPv6 setting fixed it.
>
> My problem was *triggered* by changing the IPv6 setting from
> "Automatically
>
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Thu Jun 13, 2013 10:19 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"N.A. Nada"
Thanks for the warning Jon.
Software Update had not run yet this week, so I ran it and selected to ignore this update, since it could affect my AEBS.
Brent
On Jun 13, 2013, at 9:36 PM, Jon Kreisler wrote:
It appears the problem with AirPort Utility 6.3 may be more complex. Apple
is definitely aware of some of the problems. I guess we may have to wait
for Apple to do something.
Jon
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Jim Saklad <jimdoc@icloud.com > wrote:
> **
>
>
> >> Well, having upgraded to 6.3, I have apparently also done something
> that seems to have bricked my Airport Extreme Base Station.
> >>
> >> Airport Utility on my MBPro simply no longer can find it.
> >
> > The same thing happened to mine, but following the above tip for
> changing the iPv6 setting fixed it.
>
> My problem was *triggered* by changing the IPv6 setting from
> "Automatically" TO "Link-local only".
>
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.com
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Software Update had not run yet this week, so I ran it and selected to ignore this update, since it could affect my AEBS.
Brent
On Jun 13, 2013, at 9:36 PM, Jon Kreisler wrote:
It appears the problem with AirPort Utility 6.3 may be more complex. Apple
is definitely aware of some of the problems. I guess we may have to wait
for Apple to do something.
Jon
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Jim Saklad <jimdoc@icloud.
> **
>
>
> >> Well, having upgraded to 6.3, I have apparently also done something
> that seems to have bricked my Airport Extreme Base Station.
> >>
> >> Airport Utility on my MBPro simply no longer can find it.
> >
> > The same thing happened to mine, but following the above tip for
> changing the iPv6 setting fixed it.
>
> My problem was *triggered* by changing the IPv6 setting from
> "Automatically
>
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Fri Jun 14, 2013 4:14 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Otto Nikolaus" nikyzf
It's a design that seems so obvious now, but no one had done it before.
I think it could look better only if looked more like the Lecson AP1, a
classic hi-fi amplifier design from the mid-70s.
<lecson ap1<http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=lecson+ap1&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=ECG6UcTfOY2v7AaU7IHgAQ&ved=0CDMQsAQ&biw=1584&bih=875 >
>
<http://lecsonaudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/lecson-AC1-AP1-photo.jpg
>
Some PC makers tried to copy the Mac mini, but without much success. I
wonder if they will even try to copy the new Pro?
Otto
On 13 June 2013 03:09, Randy B. Singer <randy@macattorney.com > wrote:
>
>
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2420272,00.asp
>
> A Standing O for Apple's New Mac Pro
>
> Ever wonder why there has been a massive slowdown in PC growth? Don't
> blame Windows 8, blame Apple!
>
> Apple has been the leader in tech and there is no indication that anything
> has changed. Dell is no leader, nor is Microsoft, Lenovo, or IBM. It's
> Apple. And Apple went too long without showing something new, thus the
> desktop market slowed down.
>
> So it finally rolls out what appears to be a spectacular desktop machine
> capable of delivering a whopping seven teraflops of processing power. This
> is obviously the future king of all multimedia work, especially video
> editing, which needs all the help it can get. I would also assume that sort
> of power would make any Adobe application pop. No waiting!
>
> The machine maxes out with 12 cores of Xeon E5 power and a souped-up RAM
> subsystem that will peak at 60 gigabytes per second bandwidth. It's a total
> butt-kicker that has no peer today.
>
> Tomorrow is another story because within 30 days, the PC competition will
> roll out all sorts of machines that will attempt to match the Mac and
> undercut the price. Then again, maybe the competition won't do anything.
>
> And even if they do something, it will pale in comparison to the Mac Pro's
> radical design. It's a 6.6-by-9.9-inch tube. It's not a box and it's not
> the old Apple cheese grater. Its unique design will surely win a lot of
> awards.
>
> More importantly, you now have to wonder how the competition will counter
> this. Will someone else make a tubular computer? I doubt it since the
> competition can barely manage a cube, let alone a tube like this.
>
> Apple left the PC designers in the dust with the old cheese grater and
> then blew up the market for laptops with the MacBooks and their unique
> solid aluminum cases. Now this. All the while, the PC desktoppers were
> still making big funky boxes filled with mostly air (and still
> overheating). Even the iMac was hard to copy. A few makers tried but got
> zero traction.
>
> In this column, I've chided the PC makers for being duds for years. Most
> recently, I said that these folks should be promoting high-performance and
> three-monitor setups.
>
> Of course nothing came of the idea. Now Apple rolls this gem out bragging
> about teraflops and multiple monitors—and not just three monitors but three
> 4K monitors!
>
> The brain-dead PC folks are flat-footed once more. I can hear the counter
> argument already: "Well, this is all well and good but at the end of the
> day, people will be buying our cheap junk anyway because, well, it's cheap."
>
> The PC makers should be ever so proud.
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I think it could look better only if looked more like the Lecson AP1, a
classic hi-fi amplifier design from the mid-70s.
<lecson ap1<http://www.google.
>
<http://lecsonaudio.
>
Some PC makers tried to copy the Mac mini, but without much success. I
wonder if they will even try to copy the new Pro?
Otto
On 13 June 2013 03:09, Randy B. Singer <randy@macattorney.
>
>
> http://www.pcmag.
>
> A Standing O for Apple's New Mac Pro
>
> Ever wonder why there has been a massive slowdown in PC growth? Don't
> blame Windows 8, blame Apple!
>
> Apple has been the leader in tech and there is no indication that anything
> has changed. Dell is no leader, nor is Microsoft, Lenovo, or IBM. It's
> Apple. And Apple went too long without showing something new, thus the
> desktop market slowed down.
>
> So it finally rolls out what appears to be a spectacular desktop machine
> capable of delivering a whopping seven teraflops of processing power. This
> is obviously the future king of all multimedia work, especially video
> editing, which needs all the help it can get. I would also assume that sort
> of power would make any Adobe application pop. No waiting!
>
> The machine maxes out with 12 cores of Xeon E5 power and a souped-up RAM
> subsystem that will peak at 60 gigabytes per second bandwidth. It's a total
> butt-kicker that has no peer today.
>
> Tomorrow is another story because within 30 days, the PC competition will
> roll out all sorts of machines that will attempt to match the Mac and
> undercut the price. Then again, maybe the competition won't do anything.
>
> And even if they do something, it will pale in comparison to the Mac Pro's
> radical design. It's a 6.6-by-9.9-inch tube. It's not a box and it's not
> the old Apple cheese grater. Its unique design will surely win a lot of
> awards.
>
> More importantly, you now have to wonder how the competition will counter
> this. Will someone else make a tubular computer? I doubt it since the
> competition can barely manage a cube, let alone a tube like this.
>
> Apple left the PC designers in the dust with the old cheese grater and
> then blew up the market for laptops with the MacBooks and their unique
> solid aluminum cases. Now this. All the while, the PC desktoppers were
> still making big funky boxes filled with mostly air (and still
> overheating)
> zero traction.
>
> In this column, I've chided the PC makers for being duds for years. Most
> recently, I said that these folks should be promoting high-performance and
> three-monitor setups.
>
> Of course nothing came of the idea. Now Apple rolls this gem out bragging
> about teraflops and multiple monitors—and not just three monitors but three
> 4K monitors!
>
> The brain-dead PC folks are flat-footed once more. I can hear the counter
> argument already: "Well, this is all well and good but at the end of the
> day, people will be buying our cheap junk anyway because, well, it's cheap."
>
> The PC makers should be ever so proud.
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
GROUP FOOTER MESSAGE
