Perhaps because built-in graphics chipsets can run much faster than current eGPUs. As Thunderbolt advances, perhaps the distinction will disappear. But for now there's a noticeable difference.
Well, I’m neither for nor against this product so its fate doesn’t concern me. As for Apple’s product strategy... that’s something I think fits some people better than others. This forum isn’t a good measure of Apple’s praiseworthiness. It has always trended negative for one reason or another. We here represent such an extremely small minority of Apple’s core users that I wouldn’t think we’re representative of anything meaningful.
Are they arrogant or are you interpreting what they are doing as arrogance? Big difference there. There are some smart people in charge of Apple who have the numbers in front of them; we don’t. No company is eternal and most will fall hard. The only question is how and when. No big deal to me. It will either be like Ma Bell and break up into lots of smaller companies or it will spawn a bunch of new ones when it falls.
Also don't forget that in 3 years you can ditch the Vega 64 for whatever the latest card is and upgrade for $300-500, vs buying a whole new one of these.
I think most people realise Blackmagic's eGPU is not an Apple product. It is, however, an Apple recommended product. Just like that Apple recommended LG monitor. Giving that recommendation to an overpriced and underpowered for the money eGPU invites the criticism. Criticism which has been focus on Apple and Blackmagic.
Apple does deserve it though (at least partially). Their poor design choices (like no decent graphics in Macs) is what necessitates these super expensive workarounds.
So far (most) people are ranting about an extremely overpriced piece of hardware, no matter who builds it.
