ApplePoor

Folks, this is an Apple device and one pays dearly to play in the Apple world. 

Back in the early 1990s, Apple's IIfx was king of the Apple computer mountain. Fully loaded with 32Mb of third party memory, a very heavy 21" Radius color CRT monitor with Radius video card and a 80 MB hard drive, the cost was close to $12,000 in 1990 dollars. I checked and that amount in today's dollars is over $29,000 so the current loaded Mac M3 Ultra Mac Studio at just over $14,000 is a relative bargain.

Photoshop v1.3 was on several 3.5" discs. 

One buys the tool for the job. If one is not doing the "AI" thing, then the M4 Max Mac Studio is probably sufficient or even the M4 Pro mini which is close to the power of the M1 Ultra Studio with nearly double the single core speed of the M1 Ultra.

A nervous nellie probably should not read AppleInsider and Mac Rumors. 

Just lower your expectations to ZERO and you will not be disappointed.

The new stuff that was actually operational came out on the next generation device. The peanut gallery was left in the dark until launch day. Thus there was no disappointment that the latest frabitz was not working as designed.

Geez. There are actually some real life and death issues in the news daily now to worry about.......

This fiasco reminds me of an incident at a Computer World in Chicago eons ago. I walked up to a display of a large hard drive with a clear cover. The heads were moving back and forth uniformly across the disk. After a minute or two, I asked the vendor, "is this already an operational product?" He smiled and said yes.

I said you have a switch in the device going from plus to negative voltage  to swing the head across the disc continously with no random head movement. This is not really operational. He looked embarrassed and said I was correct. They hoped to have it working soon......

Sound familiar?

They hope to have AI soon......

The misleading advertising to entice sales and the hype of the move to 16GB of ram is now the minimum necessary for AI smells like a sewage plant poorly run.

Apple needed the 16GB of ram minimum for years but put profit over customer approvals. Ever since I started in the computers back in the 70s, more memory was the least expensive upgrade to boost performance, but that all changed at Apple when they soldered in the Memory and SSDs. Now a relatively modest expenditure to improve a computer a customer had ALREADY purchased with more memory has morphed into "buy a new computer".

There are not enough fans to get the oder of this out of the atmosphere. Apple blew away all consumer trust this year with all of the massive advertising across their entire product lines that their non-working AI was all set to go., That was the complete hype for the iPhone 16 series and why folks needed to buy it now. 

Some tentative features even were retracted as they really were hardly "alpha" let alone "beta" features.  

AI is operational in some arenas of the computer industry but definitely NOT in the Apple World.

The billions wasted on the car project and the goofy Googles that ceased production in less than a year due to lack of sales shows that Apple's management team is way over paid and really out of touch. Tim's only justifiable claim to fame is the Apple Watch which is an insignificant percentage of sales.

It is definitely  time to kick back sides and take names for the exit from Apple program.

Back in the day of the IIfx in the early 90s which was a two core CPU, Photoshop was about the only game in town claiming to use multi processors.  I did not see much difference when running the same job on my Iici. Adobe admitted they had not mastered muti-core when I called.

So, I wonder in a M3 Ultra Mac Studio if there is a way to verify all 80 GPU cores are actually doing something let alone all 32 of the CPU cores?

The power supply is rated 480 watts so if that load is in process, could a sandwich be warmed on top of the case?