It's okay dude I wasn't asking. It was a poorly phrased comment back to the Major. I should have stated that here in the UK the Mac used market is exceedingly strong! The 2 macs in my signature would easily net me 1500 to 1750 via eBay etc so probably 50% residual minimum in 3 yrs. I wasn't asking about nMP residual, the MP used market gives a very good indication of how that will probably pan out.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Regretfully leaving the Apple camp
- Thread starter Cubemmal
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's okay dude I wasn't asking. It was a poorly phrased comment back to the Major. I should have stated that here in the UK the Mac used market is exceedingly strong! The 2 macs in my signature would easily net me 1500 to 1750 via eBay etc so probably 50% residual minimum in 3 yrs. I wasn't asking about nMP residual, the MP used market gives a very good indication of how that will probably pan out.
What's all this anger? Aren't we basically agreeing? (Except the part about me being a "hostile noob" -- obviously I'm not a noob and clearly not hostile.)
You want a cheap development machine and a good gaming system. Apple offers neither of these things. It completely makes sense that you're going to get something else. (Well, the nMP will probably be a good gaming machine for a while, but likely will suffer over time due to a lack of GPU upgrade options and is anything but cheap.)
I'm already coming up on year 5 with my Mac Pro along with 8 other Apple computers and other devices going strong. For every Mac Pro thats on its last legs probably 20+ more that is still working great.
Not another I can build a cheaper/faster system so it compares to a workstation grade computer statement.
Last edited by a moderator:
Not another I have no idea what other peoples' computing needs are so I'll just make a snide remark and be on my way...statement.
And yeah - the point is - I can build a faster/better system that suits MY needs and do it for nearly half the price (I still want to see someone spec out the above for under $3K on a Mac - Applecare and tax included btw) and enjoy the ability to upgrade almost any component.
Last edited by a moderator:
Exactly, so why are you bringing up two different computers based on two different needs and assume they are the something? Ones a consumer version the other for business with different levels of support with different hardware.
Last edited by a moderator:
It seems like Intel is behind preventing it from proliferating:
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/162652-diy-external-thunderbolt-gpu-turbo-charges-macbook-air-graphics-performance-by-7x
And for the Console market, it looks like they want to follow Microsoft model of charging for a subscription...I despise it...
Sony will offer support for old games in the PS4 via a subscription service, and I am not sure if it will be an all you can eat service, or if you have to pay to enable playing the games you own, or something like this:
http://m.gamefly.com/
How so? They won't certify anything that can't be hot plugged. If you have to reboot to make the card show up, it won't pass certification. There may not be a sufficient number of potential customers who would really pay for that at the performance offered. If you look up something like a 680 Mac edition, they were already $600. The thunderbolt version would probably be $750 minimum with reduced performance on higher resolution textures. If it was a profitable idea with thunderbolt 1.0, you would have seen it by now.
Yes, I agree with most of your comments.
The amateur solution I cited was to give an example that technically it could be done, and if it has the right support from Intel and any other professional video company it could be a way to fill the void created by Apple.
I like the idea of plug and play for making upgrades without the need to tinker with the glue and soldered stuff inside of today's apple toys.
As of today there should had been some solutions offered, but it seems that Thunderbolt is still too expensive, as was the SCSI and FireWire...and their adoption was driven by companies like Apple pushing it.
Why you think the performance at higher resolution will suffer?
The 4K UHD Retina whatever kind of display will be offered by Apple in the near future will be bigger and requiring higher processing power.
Nowadays some of the movies produced and shown at high end digital movie theaters are produced with currently available technology, I don't think it couldn't be scalable to a personal computer, either Apple or another company willing to fill the void could easily make it happen if they want to.
While more people is willing to pay every two to three years for a new apple computer just to browse the web, email, facebook and play candy crush there will always be a bigger market for what Apple is currently offering.
But if you walk into any store you will see things that 10 years ago were deem too expensive: there is a plethora of smart big screen TVs at all sizes, resolutions, features and brands all over and anyone who can afford them from $300 to $3000 can get one and it's getting one.
The next level of 4K/UHD is still unreachable because it is not in high demand due it's price point...but it will, like DVDs, BluRay, HD TVs laptops, smartphones and the tablets did...
will someone, please- anybody... chime in and say "i'm going to buy a $6000 computer and then replace it in 2-3 years with another $6000 computer"
this site is full of fans/devoties/Apple-loyal so i'm sure it will be easy to find these mysterious people you guys keep speaking of.. I'm especially interested in finding the person who is buying a 12core/d700 that will just follow this supposed 3 year replacement plan.
That's not at all unreasonable. If you buy a $6000 Mac today, it'll probably resell for $4000-$5000 in three years, making an upgrade well within reason.
it won't resell for that much if it's disposable/non-upgradeable.. not even close to that amount.. i mean, how many people would be buying used 4,1s if not for the ability to put new cpu and graphics in there?
We can certainly disagree, although you're being a bit "over the top" by calling it disposable. The Mac Pro is not a throw-away item. However, all current iMac and MacBook computers are pretty much non-upgradeable and they hold their resale value better than any other computers on the market. I don't think the new Mac Pro will be any different.
I'm not calling it disposable. I'm talking to people in the thread who are calling it that.
I think it's far from disposable.. the design/layout shows us this.
(edit) but I don't think other apple products can fetch 60-85% of their initial cost on the used market after 3years
Sorry, I misunderstood. I was getting some heat on this thread from some people who weren't getting the point, you weren't one of them.
----------
I agree with this, though I don't know the reference. This nMP doesn't make sense with the video lineup, but if they upgrade to R5/R7/R9 (with plenty of marketing spin) then the machine might make more sense. Certainly Crossfire under Win7 should work, and it'll have some serious GPU behind it.
But, being Apple we have no idea what their plans are.
While it has been true in the past that Macs held their value well - I believe that will not be the case with the current crop of retina non-upgradeable laptops, some iMacs and possibly even the Mac Pro.
1. 4K resolution is replacing retina and quicker than people realize.
2. 4K resolution will push graphics chipsets really hard and require much more ram than 8 gigs of ram and integrated graphics.
3. Even without 4k being an issue, lack of upgradeability will mean even typical 18-month cycles that will require 16 gb ram will be enough to render earlier laptops useless unless purchasers were wise enough to have 16 gigs installed at time of purchase. For example - had the 2009 - 2011 laptops been limited to 2GB RAM, what good would they be today?
If Apple wants us to purchase Macs for a 2 - 3 yr period of time and then dump 'em - fine - but then they should price them at a discount, not a premium.
I think newer Mac purchasers should be really cautious - buy a Mini on the cheap, max everything out at your expense or go PC. I've chosen the latter and believe me - I am not thrilled about it!
1. 4K resolution is replacing retina and quicker than people realize.
2. 4K resolution will push graphics chipsets really hard and require much more ram than 8 gigs of ram and integrated graphics.
3. Even without 4k being an issue, lack of upgradeability will mean even typical 18-month cycles that will require 16 gb ram will be enough to render earlier laptops useless unless purchasers were wise enough to have 16 gigs installed at time of purchase. For example - had the 2009 - 2011 laptops been limited to 2GB RAM, what good would they be today?
If Apple wants us to purchase Macs for a 2 - 3 yr period of time and then dump 'em - fine - but then they should price them at a discount, not a premium.
I think newer Mac purchasers should be really cautious - buy a Mini on the cheap, max everything out at your expense or go PC. I've chosen the latter and believe me - I am not thrilled about it!
A good sign is that Apple released for free the upgrades to iOS 7 and Mavericks, and also released iLife apps included, and still included some of the old hardware. In previous years the trend was to not support many of the former hardware.
As I mentioned above the business case for leasing the Macs might be a better option if it becomes available.
True but if your computer is under spec'd these earlier iterations will barely function. The newest iOS on the iPhone 4 would be an appropriate analogy. I applaud Apple for doing this but they are really giving many power users fewer and fewer options of late.
There are many businesses where they write off machines in 3 years. I've seen gamers replace their machines in 6 months to 1 year completely, not just their graphics card. It depends on the use and how long you can still use it. For some the machine isn't good enough after those 2~3 years. Mind you, it is about having a good balance in the machine meaning cpu, gpu, memory and i/o needs to be on par. Having only 1 component as the fastest usually doesn't make the machine that much faster. It is all about finding that sweetspot between those components. Which is why people write off their machines in 2 to 3 years. It is better to renew all parts so why not buy an entirely new machine?