So a Mac Pro refurb with less RAM costs more than a new one with the same specs except the RAM...

Has Apple lost their mind?

Refurb:
24449

New:
24450

WHAT?!

sudo rm -rf /

Another example, this time even worse...

Refurb:
24451

New:
24452

Insane!!
$250 bucks more to pay for a refurb with 3GB less RAM with the same specs other wise.

duplicate

I was hoping for INSANE=GOOD!

sudo rm -rf /

Why would anyone buy either one of these these refurbs when you can get a new one with more RAM from Apple for less, it makes absolutely zero sense.

...knock, knock... hello...? Apple...? is anyone actually minding the store...?

i have seen this kind of thing numerous times with 2010 refurb MBPs on the refurb store...their original retail was much higher than the 2011 QC models so even at "refurb pricing" they are often almost as expensive/the same price as a brand new 2011 model which is faster quad core and can go up to 16GB RAM..

never made a ton of sense to me either.

T9CZUEVVpvA

I used to go to Phil's Nails when it was located next to a pile of old tires on the Danforth.

Another example, this time even worse...

Refurb:
24451

New:
24452

Insane!!
$250 bucks more to pay for a refurb with 3GB less RAM with the same specs other wise.

i read some where I think it was macworld that the older machines are just as fast as the new units. probably why..

I think macworld did a test with the new laptops and new mac pros plus old mac pros
and the new laptops were faster than the new mac pro.

i read some where I think it was macworld that the older machines are just as fast as the new units. probably why..

I think macworld did a test with the new laptops and new mac pros plus old mac pros
and the new laptops were faster than the new mac pro.

What new Mac Pro? There isn't one... however speed alone is not the only consideration when buying a computer and does not explain the pricing discrepancy I am indicating here.

What new Mac Pro? There isn't one... however speed alone is not the only consideration when buying a computer and does not explain the pricing discrepancy I am indicating here.

Meet the new Mac Pro, about the same as the old Mac Pro Review | Macworld (http://www.macworld.com/article/1167386/meet_the_new_mac_pro_about_the_same_as_the_old_mac _pro.html)

Meet the new Mac Pro, about the same as the old Mac Pro Review | Macworld (http://www.macworld.com/article/1167386/meet_the_new_mac_pro_about_the_same_as_the_old_mac _pro.html)

They aren't new Mac Pros even Apple removed the NEW tag.... Macworld is behind the times.

They aren't new Mac Pros even Apple removed the NEW tag.... Macworld is behind the times.

Actually they technically are - the processors were very marginally upgraded. Thus, new. They removed the 'NEW' tag because Apple eventually admitted it's not new enough to justify the 'NEW!' tag.

Actually they technically are - the processors were very marginally upgraded. Thus, new. They removed the 'NEW' tag because Apple eventually admitted it's not new enough to justify the 'NEW!' tag.
Exactly. They have conducted such "quite" upgrades before and never said they were new...

The architecture remains, the available graphic cards remains the same, the type of RAM remains the same, the superdrive(s) remains the same, the enclosure remains the same, the number of hard drive bays remain the same, the PCIe speeds remain the same (worst of all perhaps), the number of PCIe expansion slots remain the same, the possible peripherals remain the same, the ports remain the the same etc., etc... the only thing that has changed is the available CPUs on some models... they are not new Mac Pros... not IMO and clearly not in Apple's as well.