Best mac pro for websites

What do realistically need to setup a professional website. Mac Pro suggestions...

What do realistically need to setup a professional website.
How long is a piece of string?
Seriously. There are so many variables here.
For a start, 'professional' doesn't really say anything. There are professional, highly-designed, focussed web sites that target niche markets and may only see a few occasional hits. Then there are professional mass-market web sites that see billions of hits per month (e.g. YouTube). To say you want to setup a 'professional' web site doesn't mean anything in relation to the server.
Even moving on from there, 100,000 visitors doesn't mean much if they all come, look at the top (static) page and go away, when compared to 100,000 visitors who spend hours navigating through a media-rich environment that's 99% database driven with two-way, dynamic content on every page.
Pretty much any Mac, including the Mac Mini, can serve literally millions of hits per day if you're only dealing with static content. If you're dealing with dynamic content with a database back-end then that ups the ante significantly. Add multi-megabyte file downloads (such as video or audio files) into the mix and you have another bottleneck again.
Or maybe by 'professional' you mean you need something that's always available, so you're talking multiple servers for redundancy with automatic failover capability between them. That adds to the complexity
Or maybe by 'professional' you mean something that looks good and has a good user experience. For that you need a good web designer than understands modern web design - the actual platform its served off is largely irrelevant for that.
Typically you'll find your network bandwidth is your major constraint before you start to sweat on the server hardware. It doesn't sound like you have that set yet, which worries me a little. You're not planning on hosting this out of your house are you? If so have you considered the issues of power availability/reliability? network reliability? cooling? etc.
Few network providers offer significant service level agreements for residential connections. Many often prohibit running servers there anyway. You may need to step up to a business-grade service but at that point you might as well consider a hosted solution, or even a cloud-based solution which will let you scale based on your actual traffic needs and take care of much of the heavy-lifting for you.
So in short there are many variables here. You haven't provided enough information to be able to answer your question in any detail. It's all just speculation at this point.

Similar Messages

What is best Mac Pro for photoshop for the money?

I need to purchase a mac pro to use for digital retouching and photography. Which machine will i get the best performance for my money, I am on a budget.

The best would be 6-core 3.33GHz 24GB RAM and would hold up best over time.
http://discussions.apple.com/messageview.jspa?messageID=12296219&stqc=true
MHz matter, and so too does RAM.
This article, and then browse how to choose Mac Pro, benchmarks etc on site:
http://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2010/20100905_HallofFameShame--macpro.html
http://macperformanceguide.com/Reviews-MacProWestmere-CoresExplained.html
There are always good buys from Apple Specials, from $2100 and up, just be careful or totally avoid any of the 8-core / dual processor models.
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac/mac_pro

What is the best Mac pro for Apps Developement

Can somebody give me some suugestions on the right spec for a Macbook pro fro apps DEV?

Retina display is the future.
Top end MBP with Retina Display.
Best.

Best Mac Pro for photography?

I am evaluating now to upgrade my system and I am thinking to buy a powerful MacPro.
I am a decennial Apple user (I have started with a 8600 A/V and Mac OS 6) therefore I have tried more or less every different solutions, according with my needs at the time.
Now, working in photography (Aperture with various plugins, Photoshop) 90% of my computer work I am searching to have virtually zero waiting time, more than stressed from the rainbow spinning wheel of my old MacBook 15" (4 years life).
I am aware any MacPro I will choose will be light-years ahead of my trusted old laptop, but I would like to know from other users in this community if anyone can suggest me an optimised configuration, according with price and performance.
I could go from the base to the top of the range, since I will choose a financing plan anyway, but I don't want to waste money for just "few nanosecond more" in speed. Solidity and upgradable options are good points to consider for me.
Thanks for any upcoming advice.
Have a great day,
Marco

Thank you to all of you for the precious suggestions!
@TheHatter: I have seen the link you gave me, but I am a bit concerned to manipulate the computer so heavily as you suggested, as I am sure it's a good value for money operation.
@CGW3: I had iMacs in the past and thus they are ready made good machines I have found they reach their obsolescence a bit too fast compared to the MacPros, which are much easily upgradable or even set as office server once the processors become too slow for calculation (as I did previously with a G4).
@Grant: thanks for the advice, in fact I wasn't oriented to the iMacs from the beginning...
My initial question was if someone has experienced troubles or at the opposite absolute good performances with a peculiar configuration of the actual MacPros... hence could advice where to put more/less money: bigger processor or more RAM... which is the right balance?
Thanks again,
Marco

I am a new mac user and I switch to mac due to the graphics that it brings. I do website in pc and I heard iweb is the best.NOW i heard that iweb will be discontinue. so what is the best application there for website using MAC OSX lion?

I am a new mac user and I switch to mac due to the graphics that it brings. I do website in pc and I heard iweb is the best.NOW i heard that iweb will be discontinue. so what is the best application there for website using MAC OSX lion?

It is now confirmed that iWeb, and iDVD, has been discontinued by Apple. This is evidenced by the fact that new Macs are shipping with iLife 11 installed but without iWeb and iDVD.
On June 30, 2012 MobileMe will be shutdown. However, iWeb will still continue to work but without the following:
Features No Longer Available Once MobileMe is Discontinued:
◼ Password protection
◼ Blog and photo comments
◼ Blog search
◼ Hit counter
◼ MobileMe Gallery
All of these features can be replaced with 3rd party options.
I found that if I published my site to a folder on my hard drive and then uploaded with a 3rd party FTP client subscriptions to slideshows and the RSS feed were broken. If I published directly from iWeb to the FPT server those two features continued to work correctly.
There's another problem and that's with iWeb's popup slideshows. Once the MMe servers are no longer online the popup slideshow buttons will not display their images.
Click to view full size
However, Roddy McKay and I have figured out a way to modify existing sites with those slideshows and iWeb itself so that those images will display as expected once MobileMe servers are gone. How to is described in this tutorial: #26 - How to Modify iWeb So Popup Slideshows Will Work After MobileMe is Discontinued.
It now appears that the iLife suite of applications offered on disc is now a discontinued product and the remaining supported iApps will only be available thru the App Store from now on. However, the iLife 11 boxed version that is still available at the online Apple Store (Store button at the top of the page) and those still on the shelves of retailers will include iWeb and iDVD. Those two apps were listed in small, gray text on the iLife 11 box that I bought.
Personally, if I didn't already have a copy I would purchase one to have it for reinstallation purposes if ever needed.
This might be of some interest to you at this time: Life After MobileMe.
OT

What's the best Mac Pro config for Fireworks?

What's the best Mac config for Fireworks?
I can pretty much get whatever Mac I want at work... My boss is sick and tired of watching Fireworks crash all the time... I figure a hefty processor and lots of RAM and maybe a SSD will help…
I should get a Mac Pro right? Which processor?
• Two 2.40GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon processors (12 cores)
• Two 2.66GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon processor (12 cores)
• Two 3.06GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon (12 cores)
Should I get 24GB RAM?? Or is that overkill?
I'll get a 2TB serial hard drive…
I should get a 512 GB solid state drive offered by Apple right?
Or is it possible to get a larger better 3rd party SSD?
And then maybe two 21" Displays… Two 27s seems a little much… or does it?
Thanks in advance.

Oh and what about video cards? Or is Apple's default ok? (I'm not doing hard core PhotoShop retouching or anything).

Best Mac Pro Configuration for LR?

For various reasons I'm planning on migrating from my home desktop pc ( 4 year old core2 2.4 ghz xp pro sp 3 32bit accessing 2.93 out of 4 gb ram) to a new or (lightly used recent) Mac Pro desktop. The Mac Pro is available in a lot of different configurations and I would appreciate advice on how many cores and how much ram I actually need to comfortably run LR3x and its eventual upgrades (within reason) and PS3 for now and later probably whatever is current. I'm a reasonably advanced amateur photographer; I shoot what interests me and now use LR for 90-95% of my post processing of my raw Leica and Canon image files. I do use some add-ons (SilverEfex Pro2 and such).
I understand from reading some articles that too much muscle in the Mac Pro can actually slow down LR, so if this is true I'd like to stay svelte; also economic issues are somewhat a concern.
I have already considered a laptop or an iMac and decided the Mac Pro is what I want. The question is just 'what will work best for me'?
Thanks in advance, and if you need more information just let me know.
--Bob
p.s. Is the Search Function disabled in this Forum? I couldn't get it to work.

thewhitedog wrote:
@ Bob: I think you may be have acquired some misinformation somewhere. There is no such thing as "too much muscle" in a Mac Pro in relationship to Lightroom - or any other program. OS X allocates resources to applications as they need them. Unused resources remain idle or are utilized by other applications.
Adobe posts the minimum system requirements for their applications, but these should just be taken as a starting point. In my opinion you should buy the best Mac Pro your budget can handle - and maybe a little bit more. The computer is an investment, after all, not a luxury. That said, what you need to run Lightroom efficiently and what Jay needs to do video editing are not necessarily the same. For video rendering more cores are better. For Lightroom the question of the number of CPU cores is less critical. Whereas, CPU speed is more relevant. For both, the amount of RAM can make a big difference.
I recommend as a starting point, at least a quad-core Mac Pro with 4GB of RAM. That would do if you were looking at an iMac as well.
I can understand, though, how looking at the current line-up of Mac Pros can be confusing. The older Nehalem powered Mac Pros look faster for less money, but this is now old technology. The new Intel Westmere CPUs offer significant improvements in performance. Unfortunately, they are also much more expensive than any previous Mac CPU upgrade. But if you want to "future proof" your new Mac, one with a Westmere CPU is the better way to go. The 8 core model Jay went with seems to be the best value, with two quad-core 2.4GHz Westmere CPUs. However, for just $200 more you can get the 6 core 3.33GHz Westmere CPU. For the purposes of Lightroom, the faster CPUs in the 6 core model will make more of a difference than the two extra cores in the 8 core version. And the 6 core version will handle just about any multi-tasking job you throw at it; that it, using Lightroom in conjunction with Adobe Photoshop, for example.
To confuse the issue a bit more, however, if using Lightroom is your primary concern, a Mac Pro may be overkill. The new iMacs, which came out since you started this thread, are excellent machines. You could get a lot more for your money with a 27" iMac, BTO with a quad-core 3.3GHz Intel Sandy Bridge CPU, 8GB of RAM and a 2TB hard drive for roughly $1,000 less than the Mac Pros you're looking at. Along with a capable computer you get a beautiful 27" screen on the iMac. I'm not sure why you think you need the Mac Pro. The iMac can now take up to 16GB of RAM. If you were to get one with 8GB factory installed by Apple - as a BTO option - there would still be two empty RAM slots available for a future upgrade. You could add an SSD to the iMac and still pay less than you would for the Mac Pro.
And the new iMacs have a Thunderbolt port; in fact, the 27" models have two Thunderbolt ports. These offer much better throughput and greater flexibility than any previous I/O connection. With an appropriate adaptor you can use almost any external device, including eSATA, FireWire 400 and 800, USB 1, 2 and 3 and even Ethernet and an external monitor. Of course the iMac still has a Firewire 800 port and four USB 2 ports, and an SDXC memory card slot. For what it may be worth, I suggest you give the iMac another look. Your budget will thank you.
TheWhiteDog,
Kinda, Sorta, Maybe... :-) The cost differential between the 8 and 6 cores is $200 when comparing new to new. I picked up the 8 Core Westmere 2.4 for under $3000 because it comes up on the Refurbished side... So now we're talking $700 difference. the difference in price can be used for memory (I got 4GB for $50 at OtherWorldCmputing's "Garage Sale), a drive.. any number of things. Since Apple treat refurbs as new for warranty purposes (including AppleCare), I didn't see any reason not to go with the refurbished model..
I agree a higher clock speed is better, but as you said, I also do video so more cores helps (amazingly helps).. Yes, for LR 6 3.33 cores may outperform 8 2.4s, but the 8 core machine flies with LR.
As for iMacs vs. Mac Pro.. the biggest difference is that you find with any desk top vs. a "fixed" machine like the iMac. The upgrade as far a internal (and external) drives on a Mac Pro is so much better as well as to upgrade video if I want to in the future as well. As for Thunderbolt, clearly a lot of potential, but it is a daisy chain design and the slowest device in the chain can slow down everything if not done right. There's also not a lot out there for Thunderbolt yet.. and I'm not 100% sure that there won't be an PCI card for Mac Pros for Thunderbolt (although it could be a system board feature only).
At under $3000 with 6GB of memory and a 1TB 7200 drive, combined with growrh potential and the Mac Pro I think has a longer shelf life vs. the iMac. Without those Thunderbolt adapters in the market place, you're stuck with FW800, which is a lot slower than even eSATA for external drives. Since most all the LR recommendations are to split the catalog away from the cache and away from the images themselves, it's a trickier and more costly venture on the iMac.. The 27" screen in nice, but I'm not a big fan of glossy screens. I don't think any of those allow you a matte finish option like on the Macbook Pro.
Bottom line Bob is there are different choices for different budgets... Heck I went with a 17" Macbook Pro for a long time, using an inexpensive Expresscard 34 to hook up external eSATA drives and a second 24" Dell monitor.. Great combo and I always had the portability aspect of the 17" for client work, being tethered, etc..
Jay

Which current Mac Pro for Aperture/Photoshop

After much research and what seems to be chasing my tail, I though I'd ask the forum for some advice on which machine will best suit my needs. I am currently running Aperture and Photoshop CS3 and looking for a fast machine for the job. I sort through around 2500-3000 raw files per week and hope the new Intel Xeons will speed up my workflow. It's the question of "How many cores are better?" that's confusing me as I am unclear on how many Aperture and Photoshop can actually make use of.
I'm looking to upgrade from my 3.06 iMac to a Mac Pro but having trouble choosing between a new 2.66 quad or a refurbished 2.26 8-core. I understand the drop in processor speed might be noticeable in some instances but the from what I have gathered an upgrade to the ATI HD 4870 is a must as is 6GB ram on the 2.66 and 8GB ram on the 2.26. It's not so much the price difference of the two machines (£2200 for the upgraded 2.66 and roughly £2700 for a refurbished 2.26 plus upgrades) it's will my workflow see any great benefits from the 8-core over the quad. The program I use most is Aperture, followed by Photoshop then FotoMagico, iDVD and Toast Titanium. Does Snow Leopard affect the use of cores in these programs?
Any feedback is much appreciated or pointing in the direction of some real world tests as all the bench tests of the 8-core are so impressive but I'll not be using it for 3D/Video at all.
Thanks in advance for your help.

According to the Adobe blog the delay in offering a 64-bit suite for Mac is because the entire suite has to be rewritten in Cocoa (both previous and current offerings are written in Carbon) CS5 will be written in Cocoa and will utilise the full functionality of the Snow Leopard OS (OpenGL, GCD etc) so memory addressing will be a huge step forward on Photoshop (which I use).
I used Photoshop CS4 on a 2008 Mac Pro 2 x 2.8GHz 8 core (dual Xeon 5400 series Quad core CPUs) and just recently switched to a 2009 Mac Pro 2 x 2.26GHz 8 core (Xeon 5500 series Quad core CPUs). I used CS3 on the original Mac Pro 2 x 2.66Ghz (Dual Xeon Dual Core CPUs = 4 cores total). It's not a fair reflection as CS3 ran under Rosetta on the original Mac Pro and CS4 has better integration on the Intel based Macs, but in general, I noticed a much better rate of workflow on the 8 core machines over the 4 core machine.
More importantly, I would point out that running batch process of RAW files in CaptureOne Pro was significantly performing the batch process on the 8 core machines than on the 4 core machine. (250 RAW files {with no corrections] from a Canon EOS 1D MKII into 16-bitt TIFF files). I can't remember the exact figures but the 8 core machines were @ 23 - 25 minutes quicker than the 4 core machine.
I know it's not scientific and software versions were different which could add to the different results in part, but the 8 core machines both out performed the 4 core machine substantially.
However, the 2009 Mac Pro Quad Core is capable of running 2 threads per core (in effect a virtual 8 core machine and as many reviewers have pointed out, perform faster than the 8 core Mac Pro in certain applications (which have not been written to utilise the full multi-CPU-multi-core environment.
The Memory limitation on the Quad Core is 16GB RAM (Apple state 8GB but reviewers have installed 4 x 4GB DIMMs into the Quad Core without issue). Unless you are doing 3D or HD rendering etc you probably won't really need over 16GBs of RAM, however the cost of 4GB memory sticks is expensive. Crucial only offer a 12GB kit for the Quad Core Mac Pro 2009 to make full use of the triple channel memory speeds (DDR3 best performance in multiples of 3) and 12GBs from Crucial is @£771.00 (prices correct at time of writing this. This equates to @ £257 per 4GB.
Total for Quad Mac Pro with 12GB (3 x 4GB RAM) = £2670
Total for Octo Core Mac Pro with 12GB (6 x 2GB RAM) =£2731 (New price not refurb)
Graphics card upgrade etc will be the same on both machines. Memory based on Crucial Memory prices.
So, for a 2009 Mac Pro with 12GB RAM, it is £61 dearer for an 8 core (virtual 16 cores) machine over the Quad Core Mac Pro. The 8 core system will give you further memory expansion once prices of the 4GB memory sticks come down significantly. The Quad Core will only be able to be upgraded with 8GB RAM sticks over the 4GB sticks available now and will cost a huge amount at time of launch.
Buying a refurbishment 2.26 GHz with similar memory upgrade would in my opinion be the way to go. I know the CPU clock speed is lower, but in real time non memory intensive applications the difference will be hardly noticeable.
I went through the same dilemma as you. I opted for the 8 core system with 12GB RAM and the ATI HD4870 graphics (bought as an upgrade kit so was dearer than the build to order option). I am very happy with my purchase.
The other option is to check out eBay there may be a very well spec'd 2008 Mac Pro for sale with warranty, 16GB RAM and the 8800GT graphics card for less than either of the new systems.
Over the long term, the 8 core offers more affordable customisation options over the Quad Core, but it depends on how long you plan to use the machine

Which new Mac Pro for Logic Studio?

Hi everyone,
I'm on the verge of ordering a new Mac Pro, but am tossed up over the quad 2.93 or the Octa 2.26. I'll be using it mainly for composing with Logic Studio. I find its a bit of a pain to record the sounds from my Motif ES8, so I'm going to start using software instruments more.
Does anyone know if Logic uses multiple cores? I googled this and couldn't find much on it.
If I get the quad, I'm going to load it to the max of 8G RAM. If I get the Octa 2.26, I will get 12G RAM. Will Logic take advantage of the extra RAM?
Right now, I'm leaning towards the quad 2.26. I keep my Macs for a long time. I currently have a 4 year old G5 iMac with 2G RAM.
Thanks for any opinions.

I'm With Dual G5 PowerPC version 3.1 (90nm thecnology)
Logic works fine, but when I need to recording with Omnisphere or Kontakt 3... or any Live Instruments... (anyway I'm able to use the Maximum power request patches of all 3rd party plugs that are installed in My G5)
I need MORE SINGLE THREAD POWER... because Logic and most of 3rdparty plugs allow you to use ONLY ONE CORE (or processor).
The ability to overclocking of the Nehalem processor is very interesting...
you will be able to have up to 3.3Ghz in a single thread operation!
So... I'm not sure to buy a new Mac before Snow Leopard... because I can use my G5 smoothly and if needed I have my Black Macbook for adding power (I have 2X Motu interface (828 MK3 and Mk2).
But if hypothetically I were to buy now...: the best Mac value for money semms to be the Quad 2.93 with full Ram set 8GB!
I don't believe about Multitrhead is needed for Live Audio performances
The power on the single core is very important...
I love to export as Audio the tracks
when I use 3rd party Instruments the ammount of crash risk during the Mix down the percentage are:
with Instruments in Live mode about 80% during professional mixdown
With Audio tracks 0% of crash diring professional Mixdown
Logic Pro is a rock solid DAW if used only with Audio tracks and Logic native instruments!
I'm able to MIX more than 160 Stereo tracks with My System...
I can wait for Snow Leopard Machines.
G

What is the best mac pro combination considering price

what is the best mac pro combination specs considering price

Huge downloads of e-mails is a function of your internet provider. Most give you asynchronous communication, which means the sending of information back to them is slower than the receipt of information from them. Thus simultaneous two-way communication will in fact slow you down even more.
Presentations can be a function of the display technology used. Old VGA display based projections can be slow and cumbersome. Newer ones with HDMI, DVI and Mini-Displayport are far better and require less conversion.
What kind of workbooks?
Different programs have different requirements. Again, you have not distinguished if you are interested in buying a desktop, or a notebook computer.
Desktop = Mac Pro or iMac or Mac Mini (Mac Mini can be functionally as portable as a notebook, except it does not have battery for being powered on when off the mains).
Notebook = MacBook Air or MacBook Pro

I am thinking of using a Mac pro for share trading. Can anyone share their experience and suggest specs for 30 -40 monitors etc

Hi
I am thinking of using a Mac Pro for share trading.
I am proposing to start small but want to be able to expand up to 30+ monitors.
It must be super quick.
Any help with hardware would be appreciated.
Software is secondary at this point , but open to advice.
I have an iphone and ipad so feel it will better intergrate usung Apple
regards
David

There is no desktop machine that I know of that will support 30+ monitors as is.
Fill the 3 or 4 PCIe slots of any logic board with three port graphics cards and you have the physical cap without additional hardware.
Software is secondary at this point
No, without software, how can you control more than the monitor limit of the OS?
How can you set up the monitors to display the various programs that you will wish to use simultaneously?
Software is a major consideration.
Matrox (and others) have solutions for additional monitors beyond the physical capabilities of generally offered graphics cards.
The caveat here, however, is support software is typically reserved for Windows and Linux systems.
Matrox has a single 8 display card:
http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/products/graphics_cards/m_series/m9188pciex16/
Matrox has solutions specifically targeting the finance market:
http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/solutions/trading_analyst/
Though the Mac Pro has more than adequate processing power, I think that you will find (through research) that building a solid machine capable of using several multi monitor cards is going to be what you will need to support more than 8-10 monitors with conventionally offered hardware.
Fun stuff:
http://www.digitaltigers.com/zenview.asp

Help need my mac pro for school..it has Grey screen..spinning wheel...repaid disk ok...repair disk permission all repaired but one warning...

Help need my mac pro for school..it has Grey screen..spinning wheel...
I think I have mountain lion OS X....I have done I think almost every suggestion I've seen in discussion boards.
Boot in recovery repaired disk...ok...repair disk permission...all repaired but one warning...I've tried to reinstall lion (without losing data) and it Got all the way to one minute to be done and then the time change back two hours and kept doing this all night long. I haven't done a back up due to no external for time machine.
I hope someone can please help me I've been going crazy for a week now trying to figure this out. I use my computer for school and I'm currently very behind from in my school work thank you
Also I've checked my available space 424.91 free of 750 gigs....disk is verified

Welcome to the Apple Support Communities
Try holding the Shift key while your Mac is starting to start into safe mode. Then, after starting in safe mode, open Finder, select Go menu (on the menu bar) > Go to Folder, and type /Library/StartupItems. Then, empty this folder and restart the Mac.
If your Mac starts after doing this, it was a problem with a third-party app that starts automatically when you turn on the computer. It won't start automatically anymore after doing that

Bought my mac pro for 1099. to repair it cost 754, is it worth repairng?, bought my mac pro for 1099. to repair it cost 754, is it worth repairng?

bought my mac pro for 1099. to repair it cost 754, is it worth repairng?, bought my mac pro for 1099. to repair it cost 754, is it worth repairng

It all depends - if you can put that $754 towards a new unit, an you can afford to add a little something to it, then I would go for a new computer. How old is your machine? Only you can make the decision. If your machine is older, you might want to ask the Apple Store or AASP about their 'flat rate pricing' - a scheme by which you pay a little over $300 and they repair everything on the machine. They may stick to their guns and only offer you the $754, but it's worth asking about.
See this concerning the flat rate repair option.
Good luck,
Clinton

I have a mac pro for work and they made it log on windows at start up. how can i switch back to Mac as well so i will use the i cloud fetures ?

I have a mac pro for work and they made it log on windows at start up. how can i switch back to Mac as well so i will use the i cloud fetures ?

Is a version of Mac OS running on this Mac? Reboot and hold down the option key.

What is the best macbook pro for video editing dslr footage?

what is the best macbook pro for video editing dslr footage?

It is the GPU that is important. All the CPU's will be fast enough. If you can affords it, the 15" with the NVIDIA GPU is the best.
Ciao.

Best mac pro for websites

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for