Just as everyone suspected, Apple updated its various lines of desktop computers today, bringing speed and performance improvements across the board. Mac Pro, iMac, and the Mac Mini were all upgraded, and especially for the Mini, it was a long time coming. The Mac Pro sees the most changes.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-10-12
This is really the point, is it not? If you really need ECC memory, get it, pay for it, use it.
What if you don't?
The problem is NOT that the machines are expensive for what they are. The problem is they are not what 95% of the customers need. Sometimes they are too portable when they don't need portability. Sometimes they are too peformant, with too high end processors, but they have to buy them to get something better, more expandable, than the all-in-ones.
It is not the machines that are in the product line that are being criticized, its the ones that ARE NOT THERE. This is why Macs end up being too expensive. It is that you end up buying more than you need. Or taking less performance. Its a failure of product range, not of any particular product.
Got to tell you, also, Macs, particularly the all in ones, blow up far more often than medium priced x86 towers. They just do. Sorry. ECC and all.
Member since:2008-06-09
What if you don't?
Let's not change the subject. Your original claim was that the "pro" in Mac Pro was marketing spin. I explained why it is not.
That's beside the point. The surprise success of netbooks based on the Atom processors clearly shows that 95% of the customers don't need anything more powerful than that. In fact, my wife got a Atom based netbook because it was cheap, portable and more than adequate for her work needs.
Given that laptops are outselling desktops it is safe to assume that people prefer portability over expansion and raw performance.
In your opinion that might bet the case. I would content that a macbook or mini is more than enough computer for the vast majority of people.
Please provide some real data to back that up. ECC doesn't prevent hardware failures or manufacturing defects. ECC solves real problems, that is why all server and workstation products have it. You might think it is a marketing gimmick but here is tonne of evidence supporting why ECC is necessary. All you need to do is look at how many correctable memoy errors an average server gets per year. You wouldn't be so callous about it.
You just making a claim saying, "they just do" is just an unsubstantiated claim nothing else. Do you have any data or are you just running out of arguments?
Member since:
2008-06-09
Calling it a "business workstation" is just spin. "
Really. Every single example in this thread for a cheaper alternative doesn't have ECC memory. You can call it what you want but a box without ECC is a PC for some one to check email not do business critical work.
To run pro apps with no ECC for memory not a chance. Data is the most valuable business asset. More money is lost when corruption happens than saving a few quid on purchase costs. You also want bullet proof service incase things break. Beige PCs are great but fixing things your self in a business environment costs real money.
http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/barebones.html?cpu=Intel%20i...
Again completely missing the point. No ECC no worky in Pro market. No field service support also no worky.
ECC registered DIMMS cost more on this planet.
Wrong. With Apple I get no hassle customer service. One year of no headache, 3 with an extended service contract. If some thing is wrong I call support they ship me a box I put it in and send it 99% of the time 3 days later my machine is back working like new.
Show me that with your barebones beige box. Who do I send it to to get fixed if the harddisk craps out or memory errors suddenly cause kernel panics. Who diagnoses it and repairs it for me? You?
Edited 2009-03-04 16:30 UTC