On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 10:23:38AM -0700, Jan Steinman wrote:
> > From: Jez Cunningham <jez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > I did study the iMac range but the price is way, way higher
>
> As is the resale value. That says something, doesn't it?
>
> Yes, five years ago, I bought a USED MacPro for the cost of a NEW bottom-end
> PC, and I'm still using it, whereas a five-year-old PC is a boat anchor today.
>
> Jan
Jan,
Your 9 year-old MacPro IS a <expletive deleted> PC... :)
As someone who refurbishes servers and occasionally desktops on an
almost day-to-day basis I will say that I think the age argument is a
little specious, as anything reasonable from, say, 8-10 years ago will
still be entirely useable now for just about anything non specific.
The gains made over time have been more in GPU performance and VRAM
capacity - CPUs have not advanced that much, and in some cases have gone
backwards. The current micro-PC platforms (e.g NUCs) are pretty
impressive (but also not upgradeable, either).
What most don't realise is that 'approved' software releases of
applications for any kind of fixed platform obviously have to use
"performance management" shortcuts to cater to the age-related
shortcomings of those fixed platforms (battery life scandals, anyone?),
and if the authors don't implement those shortcuts, that is a segment of
the market lost to them in fairly short order.
However, where performance is really important, software manufacturers
just put a minimum system requirements panel on their cr*ppy bloatware
and expect the hardware specs to keep the H-E-double-hockey-sticks up :)
Anything with bleeding-edge hardware is (once the bugs are worked out)
going to totally smoke last year's model.
davidt
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|