The first thread in which it was posted called out a number of specific users (many of whom were explaining that ASi would never be competitive and was a terrible idea), but also opened it to anyone who wanted to answer. Interestingly, almost none (I do not recall a single one, but I would have to go back and confirm) of the detractors ever responded. No real surprise there.
Those are great, but harder to define upfront.
True, but the goal of the original post was to get people on the record before the first machines were released so that when they came out there would be no “moving of the goal posts”, and no arguments like we are seeing of comparisons of small, thin, fan-less laptop to giant liquid cooled desktops.
Certainly a reasonable standard, but harder to measure (again, the original goal was having objective metrics).
Again, just by way of context, the original post was in response to people saying they will not buy a new ASi machine because “XXXX”. To understand what that meant of them as examples it was important to understand if they purchased machines regularly, or had not bought a new system since 2008 (as one said was the case).
What is the performance per $ that would be interesting to you? That is exactly why the question was being asked. Given the model they follow with their phones now, it seems likely they will have lower priced versions of their computers based on previous generations. Once they have amortized the R&D they can drop the price quite a bit.
The new Mac Mini starts $100 less than the previous one. I expect that when the transition is complete, there will be machines that are much faster at similar (or slightly lower) price points, machines that are somewhat faster and somewhat cheaper, and machines that are a bit faster, but quite a bit cheaper. That is why it is interesting to know what would drive purchases. To be clear, however, the original reason for asking was more related to the original reason for asking question 4. If one has not purchased a new machine since 2008 and there is really no way that one would purchase a new machine under any circumstances the statement that: “I will not buy any new machine not based on x86_64” is much less meaningful (in that the person also would not buy one based on x86_64).
If you're using logic, you may be good to go but I'd check before jumping.
On 4: in 2016 I needed more performance than my rmbp could give me. I wanted a desktop and the iMac wasn't the way for me. A Mac pro would cost me $4500. I then said to myself, for that much money I can build me a pc that's significantly faster. So I did. Fast forward to today, and the new basemodel Mac pro with additional memory and storage now cost $7700 and my pc from 2016 is still faster.The first thread in which it was posted called out a number of specific users (many of whom were explaining that ASi would never be competitive and was a terrible idea), but also opened it to anyone who wanted to answer. Interestingly, almost none (I do not recall a single one, but I would have to go back and confirm) of the detractors ever responded. No real surprise there.
Those are great, but harder to define upfront.
True, but the goal of the original post was to get people on the record before the first machines were released so that when they came out there would be no “moving of the goal posts”, and no arguments like we are seeing of comparisons of small, thin, fan-less laptop to giant liquid cooled desktops.
Certainly a reasonable standard, but harder to measure (again, the original goal was having objective metrics).
Again, just by way of context, the original post was in response to people saying they will not buy a new ASi machine because “XXXX”. To understand what that meant of them as examples it was important to understand if they purchased machines regularly, or had not bought a new system since 2008 (as one said was the case).
What is the performance per $ that would be interesting to you? That is exactly why the question was being asked. Given the model they follow with their phones now, it seems likely they will have lower priced versions of their computers based on previous generations. Once they have amortized the R&D they can drop the price quite a bit.
The new Mac Mini starts $100 less than the previous one. I expect that when the transition is complete, there will be machines that are much faster at similar (or slightly lower) price points, machines that are somewhat faster and somewhat cheaper, and machines that are a bit faster, but quite a bit cheaper. That is why it is interesting to know what would drive purchases. To be clear, however, the original reason for asking was more related to the original reason for asking question 4. If one has not purchased a new machine since 2008 and there is really no way that one would purchase a new machine under any circumstances the statement that: “I will not buy any new machine not based on x86_64” is much less meaningful (in that the person also would not buy one based on x86_64).
Thanks for going on the record though.
What did you build? How much did it cost? For what do you use it? What are your main applications? (Just to make it easy to understand your requirements. Not intending it to seem like an inquisition.)
I spend $4.5k for the Windows machine (X99 HEDT platform) in my signature, including the Synology and storage. Could have gone with the iMac, spec wise, but wouldn't been cheaper after configuring and I do not like the concept of an integrated screen. Screens tend to last longer than computers so I like to pick my own. This was the main driver to not go for a iMac. The Mac mini hadn't had a serious update in ages and the latest version back then was slower than the 2011 i7 Mac mini server I had, and my rMBP. And a Mac mini is basically a laptop in a small desktop enclosure, component wise. I wanted desktop hardware.What did you build? How much did it cost? For what do you use it? What are your main applications? (Just to make it easy to understand your requirements. Not intending it to seem like an inquisition.)
Mac SE/30, Quadra 605, and original G3 all come to mind as “properly optimized.” Final Intel Mac Mini comes pretty close despite some issues.