3 ms·

The Halo Car is an interesting parallel, but one that I believe to be fundamentally flawed. Here's the problem: Apple isn't building a Corvette, or a Viper, o

The Halo Car is an interesting parallel, but one that I believe to be fundamentally flawed. Here's the problem: Apple isn't building a Corvette, or a Viper, or even an LFA. It's building the world's fastest steam locomotive. Is it impressive? By Jove, yes. Is it fast? Ridiculously so. Is it powerful? Let me count the ways. Does it do something people want? ... The problem with the Mac Pro is that it's a solution to a problem almost no one has. It uses server hardware to solve consumer problems. Great, but ... why? Is there any consumer app out there that really takes advantage of 12 cores? Seriously, what applications have been parallelized to that degree? Anything that benefits from 12 cores will benefit more from CUDA and massive GPU parallelization. I like the idea of the Mac Pro. I like going balls out just for the hell of it. I just don't think it's a computer that anyone can really use.

jcsiracusa 14y ago
The problem with the Porsche 918 is that it's a solution to a problem almost no one has. It uses racing hardware to solve commuter problems. Great, but…why? Is there any public road out there that really takes advantage of 820 horsepower? Seriously, what routes have been designed for these speeds? Anything that benefits from 820 horsepower will benefit more from lighter weight and a better CD. I like the idea of the Porsche 918. I like going balls out just for the hell of it. I just don't think it's a car that anyone can really use.
- redthrowaway 14y ago
  The Porsche 918 is a prestige product, though. The jet set and saudi princes can point to the 918 as a status symbol. The Mac Pro doesn't have that going for it. All hypercars, from the Huayra, to the La Ferrari (gag), to the Veyron are ridiculously impractical. However, that's a feature, not a bug. Their very impracticality cements their position in the hypercar pantheon. The Mac Pro just doesn't have that cachet. It doesn't give you bragging rights, except among a tiny subset of the population. Even then, they'd likely be more impressed by triple-SLI'd GPUs in a liquid-cooled tower with a ridiculously overclocked CPU.
  - jcsiracusa 14y ago
    Only a tiny subset of the population cares about fast cars. A larger portion cares about expensive cars, of which supercars are only a small subset. Many people are dazzled by wealth. Far fewer know or care anything about performance.
mhenr18 14y ago
I run a maxed out last-gen iMac. 3.4GHz i7, 16GB RAM, 2GB VRAM. I still run into occasions where things slow down, mostly when I'm running a zillion things at once. It's not one app that needs 12 cores, it's the overall multitasking experience. You also resolved your own statement when you mentioned massive GPU parallelization. The Mac Pro is the only Mac to use desktop grade graphics (iMacs have to use mobile chipsets due to thermal constraints), and it's the only Mac where you can throw in more than one card. Unless someone comes out with a Thunderbolt PCI-e adapter for desktop graphics cards to plug into, there's still going to be a need for an expandable tower workstation machine.

jcsiracusa 14y ago

The problem with the Porsche 918 is that it's a solution to a problem almost no one has. It uses racing hardware to solve commuter problems. Great, but…why? Is there any public road out there that really takes advantage of 820 horsepower? Seriously, what routes have been designed for these speeds? Anything that benefits from 820 horsepower will benefit more from lighter weight and a better CD. I like the idea of the Porsche 918. I like going balls out just for the hell of it. I just don't think it's a car that anyone can really use.

redthrowaway 14y ago
The Porsche 918 is a prestige product, though. The jet set and saudi princes can point to the 918 as a status symbol. The Mac Pro doesn't have that going for it. All hypercars, from the Huayra, to the La Ferrari (gag), to the Veyron are ridiculously impractical. However, that's a feature, not a bug. Their very impracticality cements their position in the hypercar pantheon. The Mac Pro just doesn't have that cachet. It doesn't give you bragging rights, except among a tiny subset of the population. Even then, they'd likely be more impressed by triple-SLI'd GPUs in a liquid-cooled tower with a ridiculously overclocked CPU.
- jcsiracusa 14y ago
  Only a tiny subset of the population cares about fast cars. A larger portion cares about expensive cars, of which supercars are only a small subset. Many people are dazzled by wealth. Far fewer know or care anything about performance.

mhenr18 14y ago

I run a maxed out last-gen iMac. 3.4GHz i7, 16GB RAM, 2GB VRAM. I still run into occasions where things slow down, mostly when I'm running a zillion things at once. It's not one app that needs 12 cores, it's the overall multitasking experience. You also resolved your own statement when you mentioned massive GPU parallelization. The Mac Pro is the only Mac to use desktop grade graphics (iMacs have to use mobile chipsets due to thermal constraints), and it's the only Mac where you can throw in more than one card. Unless someone comes out with a Thunderbolt PCI-e adapter for desktop graphics cards to plug into, there's still going to be a need for an expandable tower workstation machine.