I've finally gone and done it!
08 April 2007

"It was at this point that I suddenly realised what I'd really known all along: that there's no good time to buy any form of technology. It's always going to be out of date as soon as you've parted company with your credit card number."

After months of faffing about I've finally ordered a Mac Pro and am wondering just why it took me so long to get around to it. You don't want to know, but I'm going to spend this blog getting round to working out why. Perhaps it'll help someone in the same position do much less faffing and far more buying!

In August 2005 when Steve Jobs announced that Macs were going to transition to Intel processors, I decided then and there that I would get whatever eventually replaced the then top of the range Power Mac G5. According to Apple the transition wouldn't start until June 2006 and take a year. I'd not long had my Mac Mini and had in my mind that my next computer upgrade would be Spring 2007 so that worked just fine for me.

Of course, history tells us that the move to Intel kicked off in January 2006 and was completed just 7 months later with the launch of that Power Mac replacement: the Mac Pro with Quad core processing (a computer with two dual-core CPUs). That's when I should've bought one, expect for the fact that they cost money and I didn't have any. I knew there was going to be some in October thanks to same muturing "save-as-you-earn" share options. But that was my next mistake. In October, I got the money but held off due to the internet forums being full of talk of a forthcoming Intel 4-core chip, two of which would give 8-core processing. "Surely," writers to the forums said, "the Mac Pro range will be updated with the new processor when it launches in November?".

I should digress here for a moment and talk in very geeky style about CPUs. It used to be that the faster the chip the better (in MHz and then in GHz). But thesedays processors have what are called "cores". Roughly the faster the chip and the more cores it has the better. But it isn't as clear cut as that, because cores (which amount to additional separate CPUs on the same chip) need to have "core aware" programs written to make use of them. This will change over time but the forums are full of people arguing about how good (or not) more cores can be. The Mac Pro has two dual-core processors giving a total of 4 cores, or "Quad processing" power. It's like having 4 CPUs in one computer all running at between 2 and 3 GHz.

Anyway, back to my story... November came and went and although Intel did, indeed, launch 4-core processors but this was at a slower speed than the existing 2-core versions and (with hindsight, not surprisingly) Apple didn't put them in their Mac Pro range. It would've made for a very confusing line-up. Should you buy faster chips with fewer cores or go for more cores and less speed? Despite this the forums were convinved an update was on the way: "Right," said the forum users, now working themselves up into a frenzy (me included), "the update will surely come at Macworld, San Francisco in January 2007?".

It didn't. In fact (and I've moaned about this before in this blog) there was no Mac news whatsoever let alone a Mac Pro upgrade.

At this point, my update cycle had come around and I should've bought my Mac Pro, but I held off because the forums (yes, them again) said that "Surely Apple will announce some Mac hardware upgrades in February or March because they've done that before.".

They didn't.

April came and with me now holding off for the National Association of Broadcasters event in mid-month, Apple unexpectedly announced the 8-core Mac Pro out of the blue on 4 April. It suddenly became clear why they'd waited as the new 8-core model uses two 4-core chips clocked at 3GHz each; so no slower than the top of the range dual core chips in the present line up.

It was at this point that I suddenly realised what I'd really known all along: that there's no good time to buy any form of technology. It's always going to be out of date as soon as you've parted company with your credit card number and before you even open the box! I should've listened to myself in Autumn 2006 and bought back then as I've ended up with the same spec as Apple launched last summer. But don't get me wrong, I'm not annoyed - not in any way at all. The Quad core Mac Pro is a fantastic machine. Ultra speedy (and will get more so as more core-aware applications come out), looks fantastic and is a breeze to upgrade. I've been dribbling over it for so long now it's pathetic. So I placed my order on Maundy Thursday (5 April) and paid a little extra for Saturday delivery.

That was yesterday. It didn't arrive.

Still, no-one died (not until I ring them up on Tuesday, that is) and it'll turn up eventually. I've also ordered (separately) 2GB of extra RAM (to give me 3GB total) and two 500GB hard drives so I can RAID them together for uber quick shunting of data. Buying these items and fitting them myself is saving a fair wad of cash.

The question now is that if Apple suddenly announce an upgraded spec for the Mac Pro (as will happen at some point in the not too far distant future I expect) how will I feel? Well, although having just bought one I would say this, I won't feel at all bad. Why should I? The Mac Pro is a terrific piece of kit and should last well into the future. Apple aren't Microsoft. Leopard will probably run just fine on a G3 let alone a Quad core mega machine - so I've got nothing to worry about!

Now, if it would just turn up...

EDIT 10-APR-07: Computer has arrived. Will unbox it this evening while keeping one eye on the Champions League football on the telly!