The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Tim Cook on Mac Desktop commitment Virtual Instrument Plugins
Old 5th August 2017
  #1231
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by nativeaudio View Post
If one has to buy a new 4k or 5k screen every time one buys a new iMac, one is losing money, even if the resale price possibly is better than with other PCs.
No, you get what you pay good money for. That's an investment in your production and not a loss unless you plan to botch it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nativeaudio View Post
But - if they'll releasing modular Mac Pros next year, why would one want to keep buying iMacs anyway?
The theory is that the new Mac Pros could be overkill for some music producers and that an iMac might be a better fit. I'm not sure.
Old 6th August 2017
  #1232
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain caveman View Post
The top spec'd iMac (the i7, 64GB, 2TB) costs £5,237 with AppleCare. How much is lost on that in 4 years... £3,500 or more? You can't seriously look at the resale value without also looking at the loss.

And the top spec iMac Pros are going to be much more expensive than that. Say £7,500 to be conservative. I can't see many people being willing to pay £4,000+ for a 4 year old computer, out of any warranty. So I'd imagine the loss will be substantially more with these new models.
If you're looking at a computer with respect to resale value, you're missing the point.

£5k over 4-5 years is a "usage" cost of around £1k/yr, or somewhere around £100/month. To a professional - that's a pretty worthwhile amount to spend for something that's an integral part of your arsenal. Plus of course - it's a tax write-off.

The resale value is irrelevant IMO - I've already had the value from it.

Of course, it's the difference between WANT and NEED. Someone earning their living from a product NEEDS the highest speed (that means less time is spent waiting for tasks to complete); the person who doesn't might WANT it but realistically it's their hobby, it doesn't really matter. Likewise reliability, compatibility etc - all things the professional needs and the hobbyist isn't so fussed about.

If you're worried about resale do what one would do with a car; buy a few years old so it depreciates less, let someone else take the painful hit.
Old 6th August 2017
  #1233
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
The resale value is irrelevant IMO - I've already had the value from it.
I don't have the energy to search the thread, but typically the argument of resale value shows up once someone says PCs are cheaper. In other words, it's a 'defense' of the higher price of a Mac.

So, either we care about resale value for that reason, or we don't. But we should probably be consistent.

A lot of people on Gearslutz don't do this for a living though, so to them cost is a real parameter to consider.
Old 6th August 2017
  #1234
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
I don't have the energy to search the thread, but typically the argument of resale value shows up once someone says PCs are cheaper. In other words, it's a 'defense' of the higher price of a Mac.

So, either we care about resale value for that reason, or we don't. But we should probably be consistent.

A lot of people on Gearslutz don't do this for a living though, so to them cost is a real parameter to consider.
True - although I think (as you say) it's context dependent. If you're a pro making money off your tools, you weigh up the money the faster/more powerful/less hassle computer will save you in time, and you go for that, knowing that it'll make its money back in the long term.

If you're not looking at a purchase like that, then not only are you probably not looking at the highest spec "pro" machine (and if you are, you have money to burn and again value for money possibly doesn't apply), but resale and initial cost is important. This person might possibly buy an end of line mac, a 2nd hand mac or maybe decide that there's benefits to be had from other machines.

So yes - I would suggest that the market to which "pro" machines are pitched at should not really be caring about resale, and those for whom resale matters shouldn't necessarily be looking at brand new top of the range machines.

That's not intended to sound snobbish - it's more that the highest depreciation comes from top of the line new computers!
Old 6th August 2017
  #1235
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
If you're looking at a computer with respect to resale value, you're missing the point.
The resale value thing is only really brought up by Mac users, but it can't be discussed sensibly without mentioning the massively increased losses (% wise). They never seem to mention that aspect, even after bringing up the counterpart. I was merely mentioning that buying a 5K screen over and over is an expensive way of buying a computer.

I am sure that if Apple brought out a Mac Midi with a non-laptop processor in it like a i7-7700k or whatever for closer to PC prices that rapid turnarounds of opinion would be witnessed. But at the moment we see lots of people around the internet who can't afford the Mac with the spec they'd like asking whether baseline model X would do or whether some out of warranty thing from 2012 would be alright.

It's pretty sad imo, the mythmakers continue to bang the drum that Mac is somehow superior when these people could get a turnkey solution with lifetime pro-audio support with all the power they could ever need, all well within their budget.
Old 6th August 2017
  #1236
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
If you're not looking at a purchase like that, then not only are you probably not looking at the highest spec "pro" machine (and if you are, you have money to burn and again value for money possibly doesn't apply), but resale and initial cost is important. This person might possibly buy an end of line mac, a 2nd hand mac or maybe decide that there's benefits to be had from other machines.
I agree, and I agree with the rest of what you wrote, and I think the example of just about the highest specced computer is a case that then doesn't apply to the above group. I'm just saying that if what I quoted above is correct then this resale value should be pit also against the amount of money you lose by paying more in the first place. Because either that's an issue or it isn't. And if the argument is that it's not an issue because as a pro you make the money back, then one can't use the above argument because that doesn't relate to pro users. See what I mean?

Just seems a bit hard for (some) people (not you) to be consistent is all.
Old 6th August 2017
  #1237
Lives for gear
 
zephonic's Avatar
Old 6th August 2017
  #1238
Lives for gear
 
lowkey's Avatar
 

One of the architecture firm I work for occasionally has all iMacs. When they get to the end of their life 3-5 years) they are sold to employees for a nominal amount. At the end of 5 years, after tax deductions and depreciations their value from an accounting point of view is low.

They could sell those machines for much more on the second hand market, but if they did they would have to pay tax on the profit they made selling it for more than its "on paper" value. Some firms might be happy to do that, but these guys can't be bothered as the machines have paid themselves back already.

This is an entirely different set of economics than resale of private computers, where tax incentives haven't allowed for computers to pay for themselves over time. In these cases, the resale value is important and generally used to fund new computer purchases.

For for some, resale is important. For others it's not. It's not either or.

For some the cost of support is more important (the architecture firm above uses macs and doesn't have an IT department saving them hundreds of thousands per year in wages compared to another PC based firm I've worked for).

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
I agree, and I agree with the rest of what you wrote, and I think the example of just about the highest specced computer is a case that then doesn't apply to the above group. I'm just saying that if what I quoted above is correct then this resale value should be pit also against the amount of money you lose by paying more in the first place. Because either that's an issue or it isn't. And if the argument is that it's not an issue because as a pro you make the money back, then one can't use the above argument because that doesn't relate to pro users. See what I mean?

Just seems a bit hard for (some) people (not you) to be consistent is all.
Old 6th August 2017
  #1239
I can see all those points.

One thing I think is being missed a little is that OSX simply appeals a little more to creative souls than the windows OS. It may be historical and it may be just because I've been on it for so long (although often using windows in parallel), but it seems far more fluid and focussed towards artistic pursuits - and logical too.

I've used Windows longer than I've used Mac OS, and each major revision feels like a reinvention to me. I literally couldn't use my wife's laptop (didn't help that you seemed to be forced to use her email password to unlock it!), and as someone who's used previous windows versions with no issues I found that bizarre. For someone technologically challenged like her, it was intensely frustrating.

Probably a completely different issue, and maybe partially the fault of the user (I refuse to accept it's ALL me though; like I said I've got considerable Windows experience!). But that's why you see people preferring older machines and not wanting to switch platforms; it's perfectly understandable, especially when (non pro) users only have one machine for everything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by captain caveman View Post
The resale value thing is only really brought up by Mac users, but it can't be discussed sensibly without mentioning the massively increased losses (% wise). They never seem to mention that aspect, even after bringing up the counterpart. I was merely mentioning that buying a 5K screen over and over is an expensive way of buying a computer.

I am sure that if Apple brought out a Mac Midi with a non-laptop processor in it like a i7-7700k or whatever for closer to PC prices that rapid turnarounds of opinion would be witnessed. But at the moment we see lots of people around the internet who can't afford the Mac with the spec they'd like asking whether baseline model X would do or whether some out of warranty thing from 2012 would be alright.

It's pretty sad imo, the mythmakers continue to bang the drum that Mac is somehow superior when these people could get a turnkey solution with lifetime pro-audio support with all the power they could ever need, all well within their budget.
Old 7th August 2017
  #1240
Lives for gear
 
nativeaudio's Avatar
 

The resale loss with iMacs is obvious. The other importantly loss is that one will have to buy a 4K or 5k screen when being happening with a lover resolution.
Old 7th August 2017
  #1241
Lives for gear
 
gussyg2007's Avatar
a five year old mac will be worth a lot more than it's PC equivalent
Old 7th August 2017
  #1242
Lives for gear
 
nativeaudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gussyg2007 View Post
a five year old mac will be worth a lot more than it's PC equivalent
Of course, if the original price was higher. But that doesn't change the fact that a solution which implies that every time you want to buy a new Mac, you also need to buy a new screen (a 4k/5k-screen, even if you don't need or want that) is increasing the overall expenses for the buyer.
Old 7th August 2017
  #1243
Quote:
Originally Posted by gussyg2007 View Post
a five year old mac will be worth a lot more than it's PC equivalent
IMO the average 2nd hand Mac and 2nd hand PC cannot even be compared, as there typically is not much of a discussion for buyers:
-Mac users will buy macs. Not PC's.
-PC buyers looking at 2nd hand PC's will not buy 2nd hand macs as they cost as much as a new PC
-2nd hand Macs typically come with OS, tools etc, while 2n hand PC's may not even come with a Windows license, let alone other software
-99% of 2nd hand PC's are crap, as they were crap when they were new. Most PC's on the market are built to be cheap and to sell tons of them, competing with other cheap PC's (even if their list price may be high, which is especially true for laptops).

While technically pretty similar, they serve different markets and are sold through different sales channels aimed at another public.

Whether a 2nd hand box has a certain value is always up to the buyer, as (s)he decides whether it is worth the price asked for. The seller's motive is unimportant.

That being said, I do not think 2nd hand Macs are worth what they typically cost, although when sold within 3 years it might be a nice deal when you really want a Mac. Most older Macs IMO only make sense to replace something broken when the latest model is out of budget or not compatible, which is part of Apple's business model.

I still have a G4 1.5GHz 12" Powerbook, I wonder how much I can get for it...
Old 7th August 2017
  #1244
Lives for gear
 
gussyg2007's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by nativeaudio View Post
Of course, if the original price was higher. But that doesn't change the fact that a solution which implies that every time you want to buy a new Mac, you also need to buy a new screen (a 4k/5k-screen, even if you don't need or want that) is increasing the overall expenses for the buyer.
having to buy a 4/5k screen every time you want a computer refresh is ridiculous agreed, that's why the iMac never appealed to me
MY 2012 Mac Mini ... 16 Gb, 500ssd. 2.3 quad cost me £850
I sold it for £500 nigh on 5 years later
Old 7th August 2017
  #1245
Lives for gear
 
pulsar modular's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gussyg2007 View Post
having to buy a 4/5k screen every time you want a computer refresh is ridiculous agreed, that's why the iMac never appealed to me
MY 2012 Mac Mini ... 16 Gb, 500ssd. 2.3 quad cost me £850
I sold it for £500 nigh on 5 years later
The iMac was originally conceived as a simple, low end, device, and for that it's great. It stops making sense when scaled up to more powerful specs. Certainly iMac Pro is a bit of a joke...maybe they should call it Jumbo Junior.
Old 7th August 2017
  #1246
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gussyg2007 View Post
having to buy a 4/5k screen every time you want a computer refresh is ridiculous agreed, that's why the iMac never appealed to me
MY 2012 Mac Mini ... 16 Gb, 500ssd. 2.3 quad cost me £850
I sold it for £500 nigh on 5 years later
Those 2012 quad core laptops-in-a-box lose less because:

1) They were cheaper to buy (~£1000 inc the 500GB SSD (or more if you got Apple to fit the 2 * 256GB option))
2) Apple haven't made a more powerful Mac Mini since
Old 7th August 2017
  #1247
Lives for gear
 
gussyg2007's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain caveman View Post
Those 2012 quad core laptops-in-a-box lose less because:

1) They were cheaper to buy (~£1000 inc the 500GB SSD (or more if you got Apple to fit the 2 * 256GB option))
2) Apple haven't made a more powerful Mac Mini since
or they just might happen to be a good product, that sold well and still have a value years after their sell by date is gone
Old 7th August 2017
  #1248
Lives for gear
 

Unless a 5k display is 50 inches+ I see d*ck all point in having one for music production - that is for me. The software just ends up with silly small graphics.

I have 2 4K monitors that have yet to be used in 4K mode.

If video AND audio is your game then I could see the reasoning. Hi res dual edit windows on one screen is fing great.
Old 7th August 2017
  #1249
Lives for gear
 
lowkey's Avatar
 

The first point is there are no visible pixels. Text and images are much clearer, which is easier to read. If you're like me and need glasses, a non 4/5k monitor is like forgetting to put them on. A lot of squinting and concentration required.

The second point is the OS has built in scaling, so you can size your content to be however big or small you want it to be.



Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyMac View Post
Unless a 5k display is 50 inches+ I see d*ck all point in having one for music production - that is for me. The software just ends up with silly small graphics.

I have 2 4K monitors that have yet to be used in 4K mode.

If video AND audio is your game then I could see the reasoning. Hi res dual edit windows on one screen is fing great.
Old 8th August 2017
  #1250
Lives for gear
 
nativeaudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lowkey View Post
If you're like me and need glasses, a non 4/5k monitor is like forgetting to put them on.
Apple's first 4k iMac was released when.... less than two years ago?
Wouldn't what you wrote suggest that everybody who looked at an iMac screen before that (a period of 15-20 years) looked at something which was so blurred that they felt that they needed to put glasses on?
Old 8th August 2017
  #1251
Lives for gear
 
lowkey's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nativeaudio View Post
Apple's first 4k iMac was released when.... less than two years ago?
Wouldn't what you wrote suggest that everybody who looked at an iMac screen before that (a period of 15-20 years) looked at something which was so blurred that they felt that they needed to put glasses on?
Correct. It's like when people who just get glasses put them on for the first time they are amazed that they can see properly without ever realising how bad their eyesight actually was.
if I had a dollar for every time I've heard someone say "I'd never go back to a regular screen" I'd have enough for another iMac!
If you have used a 4K monitor, going back to a non retina is like replacing your colour photocopier with a dot matrix printer.
Old 8th August 2017
  #1252
Lives for gear
 

^^^^

I'll take your word for iT.
Old 8th August 2017
  #1253
Lives for gear
 
lowkey's Avatar
 

^tell me, why don't you use your monitors in 4K mode? Do you prefer seeing individual pixels? You know you can scale the monitors so they don't look too small...well you can in Mac OS anyways. I presume Windows does the same.
Old 9th August 2017
  #1254
Lives for gear
 
Mike O's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I can see all those points.

One thing I think is being missed a little is that OSX simply appeals a little more to creative souls than the windows OS.
I too use both operating systems and find this, well.......silly.

So logically the implication surely follows, "if one prefers Win 10 he is a 'less creative' soul"? Marketing dept. Kool-Aid. I'm not one of them, but I suspect there are some very creative people using Windows DAWs and composing tools. Is Cubase or Pro Tools less creative when on Windows?

Not a big deal; this IS the inter-web after all. But both operating systems have pros and cons; even in a 'creative environment'.

Which 2" tape machine spoke 'a little more to creative souls'?
Old 9th August 2017
  #1255
Lives for gear
 
lowkey's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O View Post
I too use both operating systems and find this, well.......silly.

So logically the implication surely follows, "if one prefers Win 10 he is a 'less creative' soul"?
That is not a logical implication. That's a perfect example of a straw man argument that you are putting forward.

How about just leaving the thread if you're just here to troll?
Old 9th August 2017
  #1256
Lives for gear
 
Joe Porto's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O View Post

So logically the implication surely follows, "if one prefers Win 10 he is a 'less creative' soul"?
I don't arrive at such an implication. If I say "solid body electrics appeal to rockers", does that imply that those who play hollow bodies can't rock?
Old 9th August 2017
  #1257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O View Post
I too use both operating systems and find this, well.......silly.
Well, you're welcome to, it is just an opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O View Post
So logically the implication surely follows, "if one prefers Win 10 he is a 'less creative' soul"?
No it doesn't. It follows that those designing Windows are more likely appealing to their biggest user base - IT support staff. Trace it back to DOS and the original graphic-based Mac OS. Over time Windows has become more and more visual, but (to many) it still demands more technical knowledge, and thus appeals to the tinkerers more than those who just want to switch on and work.

Or to put it another way - literally every non-tech literate artist I know is Mac-based.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O View Post
Marketing dept. Kool-Aid. I'm not one of them, but I suspect there are some very creative people using Windows DAWs and composing tools. Is Cubase or Pro Tools less creative when on Windows?
I'm sure there are too, and please don't put words in my mouth; I was talking about the OS and everything around the DAW.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O View Post
Not a big deal; this IS the inter-web after all. But both operating systems have pros and cons; even in a 'creative environment'.
Of course, and nowhere did I suggest otherwise!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O View Post
Which 2" tape machine spoke 'a little more to creative souls'?
Now - THAT is a very silly extension of what I was suggesting.

(ignoring the fact that lining up a tape machine is always going to be a technical issue, and require a certain amount of knowhow!).
Old 9th August 2017
  #1258
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Over time Windows has become more and more visual, but (to many) it still demands more technical knowledge,
I keep on reading this, and I wonder why. I know both platforms extensively, I don't see any validation for such a remark unless it is based on something else:

IMO the main reason why this is said has 4 causes:

-people who switch platform tend to get lost at first as everything has a different place. However, in the end, Windows works out of the box and there is nothing you really need to do to get to work. For workstations, there is one major tweak which is really essential, setting the power plan to performance instead of the default hybrid energy saving mode.
PC users who switch to make require some time to adapt to OSX as well.

-people who have their only experience with XP or previous Windows systems, I fully understand and I agree that those OS incarnations did require some more experience with the OS. I hated it myself and it was the time I preferred working with OSX.

-some out of the box systems, especially laptops, come preconfigured with all kinds of bloatware basically ruining the whole experience.

-all those tweaks offered for optimizing your system makes it sound as if it does not run out of the box. Yes it does, and aside from the energy saving, it probably does an even better job as well. The tweaks are an extra, to tune the system for optimal stability and speed, although many tweaks IMO do not offer a measurable advantage.

Again: I am not commenting this as a mac vs pc thing, just commenting on a generic remark about Windows which I do not agree with.
Old 9th August 2017
  #1259
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAW PLUS View Post
I keep on reading this, and I wonder why. I know both platforms extensively, I don't see any validation for such a remark unless it is based on something else:

IMO the main reason why this is said has 4 causes:

-people who switch platform tend to get lost at first as everything has a different place. However, in the end, Windows works out of the box and there is nothing you really need to do to get to work. For workstations, there is one major tweak which is really essential, setting the power plan to performance instead of the default hybrid energy saving mode.
PC users who switch to make require some time to adapt to OSX as well.

-people who have their only experience with XP or previous Windows systems, I fully understand and I agree that those OS incarnations did require some more experience with the OS. I hated it myself and it was the time I preferred working with OSX.
It's not really as defined as all that - I think you've misunderstood what I'm saying. I'm not intending to suggest that both systems don't work as intended, it's just the different styles and the way they go about things.

Historically I'm VERY experienced on Windows since 3.1 til XP...and we've had Windows 7, 8 and 10 in the house. As Leon knows, not without issues!

It's more the way it's put together - it just feels to me like it's still trying to do it's own version of a visual operating system but can't really let go of the techie history, yet without feeling like an evolution of pre-7 versions. It's NOT like the difference between Android/iOS, which to me feel different but still appealing in the same ways. Two ways of doing the same thing.

Again - it's not like I don't feel that it can do the job, I'm just saying it doesn't appeal to many creative types in the same way that the Mac OS does.

I'm fully content to be told "it's just you and your mates". It's just an opinion on why you're not seeing a mass uptake in creative fields (And yes I know there are lots of creative types using non-mac solutions, it's just not the norm!).
Old 9th August 2017
  #1260
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
It's not really as defined as all that - I think you've misunderstood what I'm saying. I'm not intending to suggest that both systems don't work as intended, it's just the different styles and the way they go about things.

Historically I'm VERY experienced on Windows since 3.1 til XP...and we've had Windows 7, 8 and 10 in the house. As Leon knows, not without issues!

It's more the way it's put together - it just feels to me like it's still trying to do it's own version of a visual operating system but can't really let go of the techie history, yet without feeling like an evolution of pre-7 versions. It's NOT like the difference between Android/iOS, which to me feel different but still appealing in the same ways. Two ways of doing the same thing.

Again - it's not like I don't feel that it can do the job, I'm just saying it doesn't appeal to many creative types in the same way that the Mac OS does.

I'm fully content to be told "it's just you and your mates". It's just an opinion on why you're not seeing a mass uptake in creative fields (And yes I know there are lots of creative types using non-mac solutions, it's just not the norm!).
As a moderator you really should know better than making these sweeping generalisations about Windows vs MacOS. Especially about the users of these OSes. There is an obvious response to your comments but I won't go there as it will not move this discussion forward.

Alistair
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump