2011 Macbook Pro With 27" Thunderbolt Display Questions? Opinions?

[harcosparky]

Ok so I have been trying to get a fair price for my 2011 Macbook Pro and it seems people do not see them being worth what I think it is worth. After all it is only 4 months old and cost $2,799 new.

It was an impulse buy, and for me not a good one. I should have bought the 27" iMac for screen real estate.

So I have two choices ......

1) Sell the MBP at a huge loss or go through the hassle of selling on Ebay

2) Spend an additional $1,000 and get the display

In any case I am leaning towards Option 2, as I like the MBP but the display can be tough on my eyes, unless I am wearing reading glasses.


Anyone have the 27" TB Display .... I want to know of any issues with it.

Thanks

 

[EEXOOO]

In any case I am leaning towards Option 2, as I like the MBP but the display can be tough on my eyes, unless I am wearing reading glasses.

The 27" TB Display will have very small text and won't be much easier on your eyes.

 

[dusk007]

It is the same with cars buy an expensive one and it looses almost half its value in a year. Buy a cheap one and it hardly looses any value in the first few years, because those are the ones that are bought second hand.
If you'd have bought a moe reasonable priced notebook like the 13" you'd be better off.
If you don't need the mobility why get a MBP in the first place?

Afaik there are no issues with the TB Display. Apple obviously tested it with its own hardware. The only weird thing is what kind of konfigurations work in daisy chaining, but that shouldn't concern you with only one display.

 

[harcosparky]

If you don't need the mobility why get a MBP in the first place?

In all honesty, the mobility was needed at time of purchase. It was for a new job, and well as the story goes.....

Economy sucks ....

Job lost ....

At least in the short time that job lived, it more than covered the cost of the notebook.

Life goes on!

 

[CWallace]

I have a Thunderbolt display I use with my 27" iMac and 13" MacBook Pro. I love it.

 

[Runt888]

It is the same with cars buy an expensive one and it looses almost half its value in a year. Buy a cheap one and it hardly looses any value in the first few years, because those are the ones that are bought second hand.

Macs are known to retain their resale value better than computers from any other manufacturer.

 

[phyrexia]

It's not that big of a hassle to list something on eBay...I listed 8 items in twenty five minutes Wednesday night, including taking pictures.

 

[dusk007]

Macs are known to retain their resale value better than computers from any other manufacturer.

Yes but the MBP 13" baseline holds its value much better than a 15"/17" almost maxed out.
The reason Macs hold such a good resale value is only because so many people want Macs because they are In and an old and new model is next to indistinguishable from the outside. Many people cannot afford a new one and buy a used one but those people usually don't aim for the high end but low end.

 

[JMB1911]

I run my 15 inch pro on the ACD every day at work. I have the computer in clamshell mode. I love the set-up. With lion I have a few spaces and I just swap them around when needed.

I have the high end pro as well and it drives the ACD perfectly, not even a hint of "non-smoothness".

I will say, that when I have the pro open and use it as a second screen sometimes it won't push both screens 100% smooth.....but then again I am a freak about that, so if it even hints at not being smooth i notice.

 

[Mojo1]

Why spend $1000 on a new Apple display?

There are some excellent 24" displays that cost around $500; NEC has some high-rated displays for around $600. An added bonus is that they have a matte screen instead of a glassy display. I think that 24" is the sweet-spot when it comes to display quality and price.

But if 3" is that important to you, expect to spend some money for the extra screen real estate...

 

[harcosparky]

Why spend $1000 on a new Apple display?

There are some excellent 24" displays that cost around $500; NEC has some high-rated displays for around $600. An added bonus is that they have a matte screen instead of a glassy display. I think that 24" is the sweet-spot when it comes to display quality and price.

But if 3" is that important to you, expect to spend some money for the extra screen real estate...

I looked at the Thunderbolt Display - yeah it is $1,000

It does have the added functionality of the added ports.
Also the built in Mag-Safe connector for the MBP.

Glossy Screen vs Matte? Well yes it is a glossy screen as are the two 24" iMacs we have here. However the MBP that will be connected to it has the 17" Anti-Glare ( matte ) display.

 

[Freyqq]

Get a 27" 1920x1080 monitor. I got mine for $300 and is very big and easy on the eyes. The picture quality is also very good.

for example:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236091

 

[alphaod]

How much are you asking for it?

Anyways I would pick up a 27" ACD

 

[revelated]

Why spend $1000 on a new Apple display?

Pixel density. Fit more. Do more.

 

[Freyqq]

Pixel density. Fit more. Do more.

You're talking pixel density to a guy who says his eyes hurt bc the txt is too small? He needs a lower res screen. In fact, for the price I could buy 3 of those and still come out ahead. I'd have a lot more pixels too lol.

 

[Mojo1]

Pixel density. Fit more. Do more.

I understand the difference between a 24" and 27" display. And your third claim is certainly debatable...

The OP has already spent $2800 and I was simply suggesting that a very good 24" can save him $400; he can save even more if he drops down a notch in quality.

I can afford to buy any display that suits my fancy, including a 30". But 24" is just right for being able to take in the entire desktop without moving my head around when working at a normal viewing distance. I have never found myself wishing that I had additional screen real estate. And it is easier to use on a variety of desks.

Of course, a large display is one way some people trick-out their computer system. If money is not a problem and you want a lot of pixels, two 24" displays beat-out a 27" by a wide margin... and for around the same cost depending on the displays.

 

[revelated]

You're talking pixel density to a guy who says his eyes hurt bc the txt is too small? He needs a lower res screen. In fact, for the price I could buy 3 of those and still come out ahead. I'd have a lot more pixels too lol.

I understand the difference between a 24" and 27" display. And your third claim is certainly debatable...

The OP has already spent $2800 and I was simply suggesting that a very good 24" can save him $400; he can save even more if he drops down a notch in quality.

I can afford to buy any display that suits my fancy, including a 30". But 24" is just right for being able to take in the entire desktop without moving my head around when working at a normal viewing distance. I have never found myself wishing that I had additional screen real estate. And it is easier to use on a variety of desks.

Of course, a large display is one way some people trick-out their computer system. If money is not a problem and you want a lot of pixels, two 24" displays beat-out a 27" by a wide margin... and for around the same cost depending on the displays.

Multiple monitors = wasted real estate vs. a single, dense pixel display.

The "easy on the eyes" argument is negated by the fact that you can always make things larger even on the larger display. Or you can adjust the resolution.

In any event, my post was simply a response to "why would anyone buy a $1,000 display?".

 

[dilvid]

Not sure I would buy the 27" TB Display. Alot of money for something you can replicate for £240 (roughly $380).

I bought an ASUS 27" HD display (does the works mulitple inputs (DVI, VGA and HDMI), picture in picture and other fancy bits. I then just picked up the mini port to DVI adapter and I then get full 27" 1920 x 1080 HD.

I do use it as an extended display but I am tempted to get myself a Henge Dock for ease. Not sure on the last bit thought as I like my 2 screens.

From UK £899 for 27" TB Display against £265 for 27" ASUS display and DVI Adapter.

 

[DW58]

I use my 2011 15" MBP with 27" ATD, I'm delighted with the combination - the quality of the ATD is amazing.

 

[harcosparky]

It's not that big of a hassle to list something on eBay...I listed 8 items in twenty five minutes Wednesday night, including taking pictures.

Oh, listing is easy.
It's dealing with the whiners after the sale who say stuff like ..... " hey you said it was in ALMOST new condition, yet I found this 3 micron scratch on the head of one screw .... I want my money back "

I've done business on Ebay for over 10 years ... in the beginning it was easy ... people understood what the deal was on both sides. Now thanks to the direction Ebay management has taken things, and the way they advertise there are too many people on there expecting waaaaay too much. I was a Power Seller for several years and have always maintained a 100% Positive Feedback. I am proud of that accomplishment and would rather 'retire' from Ebay with that record then deal with what Ebay has become.

WOW ... sorry for the rant!

Doing the transaction in person is so much easier, or dealing with someone who understand that " almost new " does not mean " New unopened in box "

How much are you asking for it?

Anyways I would pick up a 27" ACD

I'd like to see at least $2,200.00 for it.

If I decide to sell it, I might have to bite the bullet, say a few prayers and head over to Ebay! :lol:

 

[Freyqq]

The "easy on the eyes" argument is negated by the fact that you can always make things larger even on the larger display. Or you can adjust the resolution.

Why adjust the resolution to non-native on a $1,000 monitor, when you can just buy a $300 monitor that uses that same lower resolution natively instead? Also, both are 27"

Also, I'm always weary of a display that uses an input that only a few computers in existence support. What if, 5 years from now you want to use it on a computer that only supports displayport or DVI? Thunderbolt is a new technology that may never catch on and may not be used in 5 years. I wouldn't take the risk.

 

[revelated]

Why adjust the resolution to non-native on a $1,000 monitor, when you can just buy a $300 monitor that uses that same lower resolution natively instead? Also, both are 27"

Also, I'm always weary of a display that uses an input that only a few computers in existence support. What if, 5 years from now you want to use it on a computer that only supports displayport or DVI? Thunderbolt is a new technology that may never catch on and may not be used in 5 years. I wouldn't take the risk.

See, this is the problem with consumers today. They're so riled up over "what's the next thing". I see people all the damn time worried about what the 2012 MacBook Pro's specs will be. Then it will come and people will put up a thread about the 2013 MacBook Pro's specs. So on and so forth.

Barring something unforeseen, I plan to keep my company MBP for as long as I'm an employee at that company. Realistically, the Core i5 and 8GB of RAM is futureproofed enough. But that means I have no logical need to discard the screen anytime in the near future, and if/when I do, there will always be someone who has a Thunderbolt machine that is willing to pay good money for the monitor. It commands a premium no matter how old it is. Look at the regular ACD; it doesn't go for less than $800 to this day.