MP All Models Why is older MP loosing so much value now?

[BeatCrazy]

This is exactly one of the main reasons that make some users uneasy. Once MacOS updates stop in 6 to 7 years time after device launch. Apple Silicon machines are pretty much useless just like piles of old mobile phones and tablets without software updates - too wasteful to throw away too little to continue for daily use.

After generations of users have seen and experienced benefits of MacOS on more or so open hardware, will be really interesting to see how once-again proprietary Macs play out in the longer term.

First, I think it's reasonable to expect Apple Silicon Macs will receive 9-10 years of macOS support.

Second, when the time comes (10+ years) that OS support is a limiting factor, you could install Linux on them.

And it's not like deprecated Intel Macs easily support Windows 11 running on bare metal, so they're no different (i.e. just as 'useless') than Apple Silicon Macs in this regard.

 

[kvic]

First, I think it's reasonable to expect Apple Silicon Macs will receive 9-10 years of macOS support.

This is your wishful thinking. Very early to tell at this point in time. Though I hope your wish comes true.

Second, when the time comes (10+ years) that OS support is a limiting factor, you could install Linux on them.

This is a moot point. Asashi Linux is doing fine at the moment. Far from as an alternative OS to run Apple Silicon machines. Also why bought a piece of proprietary hardware to run Linux? What keep the value of Mac in second hand markets is Hackintosh ppl/OpenCore that found ways to extend MacOS support beyond Apple official.

With proprietary hardware and ever more lock-down, any hacks yet to be seen possible. This brings up another point I want to make. How more public Apple is willing to open up its Apple Silicon architecture. Things such as documentation, documentation and documentation. I'm not optimistic on this.

And it's not like deprecated Intel Macs easily support Windows 11 running on bare metal, so they're no different (i.e. just as 'useless') than Apple Silicon Macs in this regard.

LOL. Does this point even make sense?

 

[BeatCrazy]

LOL. Does this point even make sense?

You tell me. You're not running latest Windows with Intel Macs' "open hardware", so what are you doing that you're holding as a gold standard in longevity vs. Apple Silicon?

 

[kvic]

You tell me. You're not running latest Windows with Intel Macs' "open hardware", so what are you doing that you're holding as a gold standard in longevity vs. Apple Silicon?

How difficult for you to install Windows 11 or Linux on Intel Mac? For me, it's super easy. Not so sure for you.

How difficult for ppl to install Windows on AS Mac bare metal? Impossible at the moment. You can pray to come true in 10 yrs time. LOL

 

[BeatCrazy]

How difficult for you to install Windows 11 or Linux on Intel Mac? For me, it's super easy. Not so sure for you.

How difficult for ppl to install Windows on AS Mac bare metal? Impossible at the moment. You can pray to come true in 10 yrs time. LOL

As you certainly know, Windows 11 via bare metal is not officially supported on an Intel Mac. So it's just as hacky as other unofficial solutions.

You're moving the goal posts here... if all your Intel-based solutions (except Linux) require some tomfoolery to extend the Mac's life, then there's nothing sacred about them. Outside of this forum, I don't know of any normal Mac users who go through the efforts to extend the life of their 10-year old Intels by installing a different OS.

 

[kvic]

Windows 11 via bare metal is not officially supported on an Intel Mac. So it's just as hacky as other unofficial solutions.

You're moving the goal posts here... if all your Intel-based solutions (except Linux) require some tomfoolery to extend the Mac's life, then there's nothing sacred about them. Outside of this forum, I don't know of any normal Mac users who go through the efforts to extend the life of their 10-year old Intels by installing a different OS.

No, I'm not. Either you refuse to admit benefits of open hardware and people's knowledge to make it work and useful after Apple official support ends. Or you tried to mislead me into your trap. As I said and hope it's clear to you as well about Apple Silicon, it's a closed architecture with minimal documentation. You're locked into it at Apple's mercy.

 

[BeatCrazy]

No, I'm not. Either you refuse to admit benefits of open hardware and people's knowledge to make it work and useful after Apple official support ends. Or you tried to mislead me into your trap. As I said and hope it's clear to you as well about Apple Silicon, it's a closed architecture with minimal documentation. You're locked into it at Apple's mercy.

Your fallacy is believing that Intel Macs are genuinely 'open hardware'. Aside from (soon to be dead) Windows 10, an Intel Mac's "open hardware" is just as useless to the average consumer as Apple Silicon.

I've done more OCLP and Windows installations on Intel Macs than I can count/remember. But that doesn't mean that either are mainstream solutions that substantially differentient x86 Macs from Apple Silicon at the macro level.

For any average consumer, deprecated Intel Macs are "pretty much useless just like piles of old mobile phones and tablets without software updates", per your comparison. And that's reflected in the price of 10-year old Intel Macs. They're practically (or often literally!) given away for free.

 

[kvic]

Your fallacy is believing that Intel Macs are genuinely 'open hardware'. Aside from (soon to be dead) Windows 10, an Intel Mac's "open hardware" is just as useless to the average consumer as Apple Silicon.

I've done more OCLP and Windows installations on Intel Macs than I can count/remember. But that doesn't mean that either are mainstream solutions that substantially different x86 Macs from Apple Silicon at the macro level.

For any average consumer, deprecated Intel Macs are "pretty much useless just like piles of old mobile phones and tablets without software updates", per your comparison. And that's reflected in the price of 10-year old Intel Macs. They're practically (or often literally!) given away for free.

I'm not so sure why we're arguing about this. Or is this really so difficult for you to grasp? Average consumers can sell their Intel Mac. There is a big enough demand to accept offers. People like you will pick it up and make it work for either yourself or friends and family. That's Intel Mac.

You refuse to admit that Apple Silicon is closed hardware. No need to debate what's "open" and what's "close". At this point in time, once AS Mac ends with Apple official support, good luck on you hacking them to continue their useful life.

 

[HawkTheHusky1902]

Seems like the price on ebay for used MP's has really been dropping for both the Tower and Cylinder to less than $500. Is that because of the M1 chip or just not supporting OSX past 12.6.5.?

Apple Silicon sealed its fate.

 

[BeatCrazy]

I'm not so sure why we're arguing about this. Or is this really so difficult for you to grasp? Average consumers can sell their Intel Mac. There is a big enough demand to accept offers. People like you will pick it up and make it work for either yourself or friends and family. That's Intel Mac.

You refuse to admit that Apple Silicon is closed hardware. No need to debate what's "open" and what's "close". At this point in time, once AS Mac ends with Apple official support, good luck on you hacking them to continue their useful life.

There is nothing for me to ‘admit’ because I’ve never talked about Apple Silicon being ‘open‘ or ‘closed’.

The concept that you’re arguing (that I don’t agree with) is that Intel Macs are magically ‘open hardware’ and have infinite life and software support. When in reality, they’re hardly different than Apple Silicon. Specifically for an average user. You can keep on hacking Windows 11 on old Intel Macs, but that doesn’t help the millions of people that will treat them just like an iPhone 4S.

 

[randy85]

They're not worth much now because they're old, slow and potentially unreliable as parts start to fail.

$500 gets you an M1 Mac Mini which will be faster and you can add fast external SSD storage.

A consumer machine from now is faster than a Pro machine from when Obama was president.

 

[kvic]

There is nothing for me to ‘admit’ because I’ve never talked about Apple Silicon being ‘open‘ or ‘closed’.

The concept that you’re arguing (that I don’t agree with) is that Intel Macs are magically ‘open hardware’ and have infinite life and software support. When in reality, they’re hardly different than Apple Silicon. Specifically for an average user. You can keep on hacking Windows 11 on old Intel Macs, but that doesn’t help the millions of people that will treat them just like an iPhone 4S.

Your response and persistence exactly proves my point: you deny Intel or x86_64 are open hardware (I used the words "more or so open hardware" in my initial response; in case you can't read nor comprehend) while Apple Silicon is locked down secret to Apple.

Documentations are plentiful about x86_64. It's proven the case from its existence of over two decades. While GPU in x86_64 is closed more or so, still there are open source drivers from AMD. And there are annual conferences that both AMD and Nvidia will discuss their recent GPU architectures. CPU and GPU are two essential parts for Apple Silicon. Documentation about them is lacking. Apple basically treat them like trade secrets. And we're not there yet for other Apple Silicon features such as media codecs, neutral engines, display engines, matrix multiplication accelerators and etc.

An average user has 70% chance buying a Windows PC, 20% buying a Mac. In that sense, an average user don't treat their PC like an old iPhone at all. An average user benefits from the open and resourceful support on the PC land that extend the longevity of their computers, and the 2nd hand market also flourish.

Before Apple Silicon, MacOS users enjoy similar benefit for Intel Mac due to active mackintosh community and the know-how that they build up. They also benefit from generally higher quality parts from Apple that last even longer. Sort of benefiting from both worlds. Resale values are high because there are sufficient demand that also help the sales of new devices. With Apple Silicon, Apple shut the door and lock it down. Keep it all as trade secrets. Just like previous generations of proprietary Macs. Used market will shrink because everybody see it's useless once MacOS support dropped by Apple. I could see this will eventually impact sales of new devices, and the overall healthiness of the MacOS community.

At the point in time, I even had not sealed the coffin for Apple yet that they won't slowly open up Apple Silicon. But you like the other iSheep or AAPL shareholders or whatever jump in and defend your Apple lord. Unbelievable.

 

[HDFan]

How difficult for ppl to install Windows on AS Mac bare metal? Impossible at the moment.

Actually quite easy. I'm running it at the moment. Not supported though.

 

[Matty_TypeR]

Actually quite easy. I'm running it at the moment. Not supported though.

Your running windows on an Apple silicon Mac bare with no VM? which windows you running?

 

[Yebubbleman]

Seems like the price on ebay for used MP's has really been dropping for both the Tower and Cylinder to less than $500. Is that because of the M1 chip or just not supporting OSX past 12.6.5.?

Not supporting past Monterey will do it for the 2013 model. The only folks with a practical need to buy a 2006-2012 model Mac Pro are those with super expensive software that can't run on newer Macs and similarly expensive and esoteric PCIe cards to go along with it. Otherwise, the internal expansion capabilities are pretty freakin' old. The SATA isn't even SATA III/6Gbps. Comparing Apples (Intel Macs, specifically) to Apples, a 2019 16-inch MacBook Pro would utterly dominate in performance over pretty much any 2010/12 Mac Pro.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Actually quite easy. I'm running it at the moment. Not supported though.

"Bare metal" means not virtualized. And there's no way you are running Windows for ARM64 bare metal on an Apple Silicon Mac. That's neither easy nor something anyone has ever recorded being able to do at this point.

 

[Spock]

I picked up a 2013 Mac Pro off of eBay for my collection for $250 a few months ago, quad core, 16 gb ram. I hooked it up and started to use it and found that is still a very usable machine and I have been using it pretty regularly. Thinking about doing the open core route to see how usable it will still be.

 

[DCBassman]

Normal people that just want to buy a computer for every day use

...don't buy Macs, they're too expensive. A used Windows machine is a fraction of the price and will stay current for much longer. That said, I use a 2009 Core 2 Duo iMac 27" running Linux Mint 21.1 for general use. This would be scrap and insecure under Macos, even running High Sierra.

 

[DCBassman]

...don't buy Macs, they're too expensive. A used Windows machine is a fraction of the price and will stay current for much longer. That said, I use a 2009 Core 2 Duo iMac 27" running Linux Mint 21.1 for general use. This would would be scrap and insecure under Macos, even running High Sierra.

I also run patched Windows 11 on technically unsuported PC machinery, but getting that to happen is trivial compared to running later Macos on unsupported Macs. Rufus is king for this. It also helps that Windows doesn't introduce major gotchas like needing heavyweight GPU acceleration just to run properly.

But the one thing that Windows doesn't have, although it grips me to admit it, is such beautiful hardware. I have two Windows machines and two Macs (got them both for £80!). Enough said.

 

[avro707]

Not supporting past Monterey will do it for the 2013 model. The only folks with a practical need to buy a 2006-2012 model Mac Pro are those with super expensive software that can't run on newer Macs and similarly expensive and esoteric PCIe cards to go along with it. Otherwise, the internal expansion capabilities are pretty freakin' old. The SATA isn't even SATA III/6Gbps. Comparing Apples (Intel Macs, specifically) to Apples, a 2019 16-inch MacBook Pro would utterly dominate in performance over pretty much any 2010/12 Mac Pro.

On the 5,1 you can use a Sonnet card and NVME storage, this speeds them up massively.

I also tried the highpoint card which everyone reckoned was great, I got crashes and extremely high pitched fan noise. The sonnet was reliable and quiet.

Later when I moved to the 7,1 I swapped the card and storage over to the 7,1. Simple.

I picked up a 2013 Mac Pro off of eBay for my collection for $250 a few months ago, quad core, 16 gb ram. I hooked it up and started to use it and found that is still a very usable machine and I have been using it pretty regularly. Thinking about doing the open core route to see how usable it will still be.

Not necessary to use opencore with the 6,1. It goes up to latest Monterey versions.

 

[russell_314]

...don't buy Macs, they're too expensive. A used Windows machine is a fraction of the price and will stay current for much longer. That said, I use a 2009 Core 2 Duo iMac 27" running Linux Mint 21.1 for general use. This would be scrap and insecure under Macos, even running High Sierra.

I don't think they're too expensive for what you get. A used Windows machine might cost a fraction of the price but it's going to have a fraction of the battery life, a fraction of the performance and have a fraction of the build quality.

I'm not going to shame anyone for not being able to afford a MacBook though. If all they can afford is a $250 Windows PC or Chromebook then that's perfectly fine. Sometimes you have to make do with what you have. It will get the job done. It may not be is convenient or polished, but it works

 

[Yebubbleman]

On the 5,1 you can use a Sonnet card and NVME storage, this speeds them up massively.

I also tried the highpoint card which everyone reckoned was great, I got crashes and extremely high pitched fan noise. The sonnet was reliable and quiet.

Later when I moved to the 7,1 I swapped the card and storage over to the 7,1. Simple.

It's hard to sell me (and presumably others too, hence the post) on a Mac whose own stock I/O is so outdated that you have to buy a PCIe SSD to make up for the difference. Though inter-compatibility on PCIe cards between MacPro5,1 and MacPro7,1 (and presumably Mac14,8 too) is a nice touch.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Seems like the price on ebay for used MP's has really been dropping for both the Tower and Cylinder to less than $500. Is that because of the M1 chip or just not supporting OSX past 12.6.5.?

I think the short answer is the old MPs managed to stay relevant for a VERY long time running current version of the operating systems and being able to still punch up there on performance. It is now difficult if not impossible to keep them current, and as apple goes to their own silicon, their days are limited as being relevant to current needs.

They will move to retro-classic status soon and have a lot of value in those areas. They still run a lot of cool things well and in occupy and important Mac space.

There are a few Macs I call 'rosetta stone" Macs. Where they were around through MANY versions of the operating system AND have many weird custom apple ports and media types that they supported. So they work really great from a retro standpoint of keeping those machines around if ever need to access some old types of media or data. Those Macs will very much occupy some of that space.

 

[MrScratchHook]

Everything i wanted to say has been said. outdated. BUT, im no enthusiast, i'm an audio guy who uses pro-tools and these machines just work, and aren't slow in my opinion, i use it everyday for emails, pay bills ect ect(no video stuff). i'm in the states so i don't worry about energy usage and i turn it off when not in use. i have two 2012 mac pro both dual 3.46 but keep the other one just incase one blows up which eventually will lol...with two 1 tb ssd, two nvme 2 tb each and a uad pcie card its perfect for my use. if i could steal a 7,1 i will, but not at 4k and by the time its cheap enough it most likely wont be worth it..

 

[DCBassman]

. A used Windows machine might cost a fraction of the price but it's going to have a fraction of the battery life, a fraction of the performance and have a fraction of the build quality.

None of this has been true for years. Bar the EFI/BIOS differences, the intel macs ARE Windows machines. There hasn't been any qualitative difference in the OSs for years. Build quality? Yes. But at the expense of easy repairability. With the exception of the Cheesegraters, Macs are vastly more difficult to work on. True, there are Windows-based exceptions, like Surface, which are equally unrepairable. And they are STILL not as well built as Macs.
This is not a sneer at Macs. I have two and love them, although they are desktops. I have little love for any laptops, whoever makes them. Too many compromises.