My first serious computer...

Serendipity

Liking it so far, faster than a Core i7

audiobliss

What's the spec's??

bklynNupe

nice.
If you haven't done so, please make sure you add Apple care. It is certainly worth it. I've had a mac and a iPod classic replaced on two separate occasions after the warranty had recently expired. I've also had service with no hassle on other Apple products.

mhardy6647

hmm... my own, personal, first serious computer was made by Olivetti for AT&T and had a true (!) 16-bit Intel 8086 CPU in it...
First one I really had a lot of exposure to was rockin' a 2 MHz, 8 bit Zilog Z-80 processor.
Just sayin'.

DMara

Serendipity wrote: »

Liking it so far, faster than a Core i7

Everybody think they got the fastest computer until they begin to load multiple junks into it :razz:

AsSiMiLaTeD

That Mac Pro line is in serious need of an overhaul. A lot of people expected it this year but not going to happen. I looked at one for my second setup and opted for the iMac because it was cheaper and in almost every way that matters faster

Strong Bad

Excellent choice! Load up on the RAM and that thing will crush anything you throw at it! My 2 1/2 year old 27" iMac still blazes like it's new.

Sherardp

I just bought the 27"Imac last yr around Christmas and it's blazing fast with 16gb of RAM in it. Cost of RAM is cheap, buy it from Newegg. Your MAC will love you for it. Congrats.

Serendipity

audiobliss wrote: »

What's the spec's??

Here are the specs of the computer:


One 3.2GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon Processor
6GB (three 2GB) memory
1TB hard drive
18x SuperDrive
ATI Radeon HD 5770 with 1GB GDDR5
In Stock
Free Shipping
$2,499.00

Serendipity

Yeah but that's a $6k computer.

This is a $2499 machine. Could do a lot of upgrades for $3k.

Serendipity

Are you saying this was not a good deal?

Strong Bad

I think thats a great deal! For roughly $160 you can bump the RAM to 16gb and have it smoking! I bought my iMac with 4gb of RAM, then went directly through Crucial and upped it to 16gb for, at the time, about $160.

What are you going to be doing with it primarily? (Video editing, photo editing?)

potee

I think its a **** hot machine.

Serendipity

Strong Bad wrote: »

What are you going to be doing with it primarily? (Video editing, photo editing?)

I am mainly going to be editing video in Final Cut Pro.

Drenis

Serendipity wrote: »

Are you saying this was not a good deal?

I'll come out and say it. No, it's not. That's not your fault. It's how Apple operates and they cater to a target audience with these lines of computers.

You could have spent $1000 less and had more machine.

Don't shoot me here. You asked...

Sherardp

I think the custom iMac would have been faster though........still a great PC you have though.

Syndil

I was following the "if you don't have anything nice to say" rule, but since Drenis said it... I'll agree. The Xeon W3565 CPU is from Q4 '09, as is the HD5770 vid card. To pay that much for equipment that old... Wow. You're paying a seriously hefty premium for the Apple branding.

Syndil

Also, not faster than an i7:

DMara

I agree to Syndil completely. You guys probably haven't even tried i7 w/ 16GB RAM or more and a SSD. And way way cheaper than the Mac, too.

Face

Syndil wrote: »

Also, not faster than an i7:

The programs that take advantage of high end dual XEON processors are limited too.

Strong Bad

I have to ask what you guys are doing with these PC's where you find the need for dual 2gb video cards, 32gb of RAM and dual SSD's?

My late '09 iMac has an ATI Radeon HD 4850 graphics processor with 512MB of GDDR3 memory. Although i'm still using the single 27" display running at 2560 x 1440, I could easily pump out to a second 27" display running at that resolution. Now, i'm not a gamer and I suspect all you other guys (except Serendipity) are.

I think he did just fine on his purchase. Mac OSX is a very efficient and robust OS and that system will crush anything he throws at it, including Final Cut Pro. I didn't want to go here...but...I don't miss Windows at all!

Syndil

Is the OS worth a ~$1,500 price premium? Makes that argument a little harder to swallow. Could have built a much more powerful machine to run Adobe Premier or Avid Media Composer for a whole lot less money. And I'm not even talking about dual vid cards or SSDs. I don't even run those myself. I'm just talking about hardware made within the last year.

Sherardp

Strong Bad wrote: »

I have to ask what you guys are doing with these PC's where you find the need for dual 2gb video cards, 32gb of RAM and dual SSD's?

My late '09 iMac has an ATI Radeon HD 4850 graphics processor with 512MB of GDDR3 memory. Although i'm still using the single 27" display running at 2560 x 1440, I could easily pump out to a second 27" display running at that resolution. Now, i'm not a gamer and I suspect all you other guys (except Serendipity) are.

I think he did just fine on his purchase. Mac OSX is a very efficient and robust OS and that system will crush anything he throws at it, including Final Cut Pro. I didn't want to go here...but...I don't miss Windows at all!

It's all about being able to run any and everything you throw at it. Of course there is some overkill to it like dual SSD's, but I imagine any application would be instantaneous in a rig like that. In my Windows based machine I only run 8gb RAM which is enough. Dual video cards for max frame rates while gaming, overclocking to squeeze every ounce of power out of the processor, etc.

AsSiMiLaTeD

OK, let's try a more open minded, objective post: The current Mac Pro line is not really a great buy today unless you need BOTH of the following - OSX and a computer that is easily upgradable on things like the video card and hard drives. If all you're looking for is a powerful computer that runs OSX for video editing and such, the iMac is a perfect machine and will perform as good or better than the Pro.

The curent gen iMac is faster than a Mac Pro is most ways that count, is significantly cheaper, and happens to come with a beautiful 21.5" or 27" monitor attached. The only problem with the iMac is that not every component is upgradable - things like the cpu and video card cannot be upgraded, the hard drive isn't really a user serviceable part but you can upgrade it if you're competent, and the memory is upgradable by anyone with an IQ over 90. However, the iMac is really good out of the box and very unlikely you'll need to upgrade anything except the memory.

Now, as for the other comments, there is some accuracy to them but for the most part they're not that relevant.

Dremis stated that you could buy a lot more machine for $1000 less. I happen to agree with that statement, it's called an iMac. However, I don't think that's what he had in mind, I'd imagine he's referring to another brand and probably a Windows machine. Syndil appears to be anti-Apple given his posts here and in other threads. However, he is correct in stating that the CPU in this machine isn't as fast as an i7. His statement though that you're paying for Apple Branding though is off-base, more on that in a moment. DMara agrees, and goes on the indicated that an i7 with 16GB RAM would be faster, and is also correct.

Although most of those statements are correct, they're all missing a KEY factor, those other machines don't run OSX (yeah some people have been able to hack OSX to get it to run on other hardware but this isn't a hacking discussion). I find it difficult to accept the fact that more people don't understand this. People just assume that you're paying for the Apple name, when what you're actually paying for is the apple experience. A computer, in terms of how you use it, is not just a box of hardware, it is a machine with an interface. Lots of things go into creating that interface; the hardware that runs the machine, the input devices, the output device and finally the software that ties it all together. People that buy Apple computers like the way they tie everything together better than the competing products, it's as simple as that, why's that so hard to understand?

All that being said, I do agree that the Mac Pro is in need of an overhaul as I stated above and is not worth their current asking price.

Bottom line - If you want the most powerful machine possible build yourself something or buy a high end Windows machine, if you want the highest performance machine that will run OSX and give you the overall experience get an iMac, if you want OSX but absolutely NEED upgradability then you're forced to go with the Mac Pro.

Syndil

Out of curiosity, I tried to duplicate the system specs of this particular Mac Pro at Newegg. Using high-end components, I was able to build a comparable machine for $1063 shipped. Same CPU, same amount of RAM, HDD space, etc. But I did include a SATA 6.0Gb/s controller and HDD, a Radeon HD6770 vid card (Newegg doesn't even sell HD5770s any more), and an expensive Lian-Li case, chosen because it was the one I decided most closely matches the Mac Pro look. :P But this prices includes everything, including a PSU and Windows 7 Home Premium x64.

And still, definitely not what I would build if I was building a PC today, since the CPU is so old and outdated. Could probably do a system around the i7 2600k that would blow it out of the water for even less money.

Syndil

AsSiMiLaTeD wrote: »

Although most of those statements are correct, they're all missing a KEY factor, those other machines don't run OSX (yeah some people have been able to hack OSX to get it to run on other hardware but this isn't a hacking discussion). I find it difficult to accept the fact that more people don't understand this. People just assume that you're paying for the Apple name, when what you're actually paying for is the apple experience. A computer, in terms of how you use it, is not just a box of hardware, it is a machine with an interface.

I am anti-Apple, because of the ridiculously high premiums they charge for their branding (and OS). As I just pointed out in my previous post, a similar (although slightly better hardware-wise) machine can be put together for right around $1000. That means you are paying $1,500 MORE for the "Apple experience," as you put it.

What I don't understand is how people who buy these machines can possibly think the "Apple experience" is worth that kind of a price tag. An OS is nothing more than a platform for launching other software, and much of the software available for Mac is also available for Windows.

I'm sorry but there's just no argument that can be made that will convince me that a machine running 2009 hardware is worth $1500 more than its sum of components simply because it is running OSX. No deal.

AsSiMiLaTeD

Syndil wrote: »

I am anti-Apple, because of the ridiculously high premiums they charge for their branding (and OS). As I just pointed out in my previous post, a similar (although slightly better hardware-wise) machine can be put together for right around $1000. That means you are paying $1,500 MORE for the "Apple experience," as you put it.

What I don't understand is how people who buy these machines can possibly think the "Apple experience" is worth that kind of a price tag. An OS is nothing more than a platform for launching other software, and much of the software available for Mac is also available for Windows.

I'm sorry but there's just no argument that can be made that will convince me that a machine running 2009 hardware is worth $1500 more than its sum of components simply because it is running OSX. No deal.

Fair enough, lets take that line by line:

The notion that Apple charges ridiculously high premiums is mostly incorrect. In this case I agree the Mac Pro is overpriced so I'll go along with it. However, your argument seems to go beyond this product and in most cases it simply isn't true. Take my iMac as an example, I have a 27" 2011 iMac (2.7 i5, 12GB RAM, Radeon 6770) that I paid $1600 for, regular price at best Buy. Find me another machine with similar specs and the same quality of display that's significant'y less expensive. It doesn't need to look exactly like the iMac, but I want something that looks nice and is as well built. We also have a Macbook Air, and although there are alternatives, anything that's as nice as the Air like the Samsung machine is just as expensive or costs even more. Don't even bother looking for an alternative for the MBP Retina, because nothing exists. Same goes for the mobile platform, the iPhone and iPad are either the same price or slightly more expensive than their competitors, and at least the iPad given it's display is arguably better.

As for your second point about not understanding why people think it's worth the price, the problem there is that you're projecting your values onto other people. People like different things and have different values, simple as that. This place is about as good evidence of that as there is. 99% of the population would tell you that you're crazy for paying for your audio setup when, to their ears, their HTIB sounds just as good.

Nobody is here to convince you, you came in here crapping on his thread, not the other way around.

Syndil

No, I came in in response to the OP's question of whether not he got a good deal, and even then, only after Drenis broke the ice and said "no."

OP was under the impression that his Mac Pro was faster than an i7, and perhaps that's what the salesperson told him. But it's simply not true, and if the OP is not a Mac fanatic, then the $1500 premium is definitely a waste of money.

As for other Apple products, comparing laptops and mobile devices is not as straightforward as comparing desktops. And to be honest, I have no problem with the pricing on iPhones and iPods, but I do have a serious problem with iTunes. As for the iPad, it is overpriced, but I hold that same opinion for most all tablets, so it's not just Apple hate. I wouldn't own a tablet if I hadn't caught the HP Touchpad during the fire sale pricing (which I did). IMO paying more than $200 for any tablet is a waste of money. The market doesn't agree with me because consumer demand remains high, as tablets still have the novelty factor about them. The average price will tumble, however. Mark my words.

But when it comes to desktop machines, I stand by my assertion that Apple is ridiculously overpriced.

AsSiMiLaTeD

Of course the price on tablets will come down, and it has very little to do with demand. It's like most other new technologies, they'll figure out a way to make things cheaper and costs will drop as a result. But as you said, your argument has nothing to do with Apple, but rather an entire industry which is obviously out of scope of this conversation.

The OP didn't ask if he bought the 'right' product, he asked if he got a good deal. Getting a good deal means paying a fair price for a product in relation to what you could buy the same product for elsewhere, at least that's how I think of it. As far as I can tell, unless you can point me to the same machine, new, at a cheaper price then he got a good deal. You all took that opportunity to then unload on what you think about the product.

And your assertion that their desktop computers are ridiculously overpriced is just simply wrong, unless you're limiting that statement only to the Mac Pro line. But if you're including their entire desktop collection and the iMac it simply isn't correct. I realize this thread is about the Mac Pro, but you broadened the scope to all Apple products when you said "I am anti-Apple, because of the ridiculously high premiums they charge for their branding (and OS)". I felt compelled to counter that statement by arguing that the vast majority of their products are competitively priced, and that doesn't even take into account things like the operating system and arguably better aesthetics and better materials, that's all based solely on hardware, which is only part of the equation.

I'm not trying to be overly combative, I just strongly disagree with your point of view. There are other reasons to hate Apple, and having to endure iTunes on any platform other than OSX is definitely one of them (it really is much better on it's native platform).

Strong Bad

Well we certainly are all entitled to our own opinions.

From my standpoint, I've never regretted one single bit in spending the $2600 for my iMac. I've built PC's in the past and have bought Dell's. Nothing...NOTHING has delivered more in terms of performance, reliability and sheer end user enjoyment than my iMac. I've been working in IT for roughly 10 years now and have used everything from Windows to Linux. When I come home and sit in front of my machine...it's Mac all the way for me! OSX is very clean, polished and robust! For those that feel it's NOT a serious OS...think again. I've heard all the griping and hating on OSX from the Windows community. They say things like "It's not a serious operating system like Windows. It's just a toy in my opinion!" Then after further discussion, the reason they don't like OSX is due to the lack of games available for it. So, I guess the lack of "toys" makes OSX a toy. Ok, I got it.

Strong Bad

AsSiMiLaTeD wrote: »

I'm not trying to be overly combative, I just strongly disagree with your point of view. There are other reasons to hate Apple, and having to endure iTunes on any platform other than OSX is definitely one of them (it really is much better on it's native platform).

Yep, iTunes works perfect on my iMac. I have ZERO issues with it.