Hedware

sdw2001 said:

DAalseth said:

This is very good news. Sounds like they are doing it the right way too, with renewable energy sources, not by buying offsets. 

There's no evidence that either is better for the environment.  Renewables have their own massive problems.  From wind turbines to solar panels, they are arguably worse for the environment than burning fossil fuels.  

But those adherents to the modern religion of so-called "climate change" don't care about the environment.  They care about global wealth redistribution and political power.  That is, in fact, what the entire movement is about, whether or not average people know it.  

Some may ask if climate change is a hoax. The answer is yes.  The theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming is not a hoax (though it is unproven), but climate change as a term is absolutely a hoax.  The notion that burning fossil fuels and cattle farts will cause catastrophic warming is entirely unsupported.  Warming from human activities is a moderate problem at worst, and is not well-understood.  There are simply too many known (and unknown) variables at play.  The problem should be carefully studied before we settle on any course of action.  

Those screaming about the "climate crisis" are proof positive that the entire thing is a political slogan.  It's used by politicians to push "solutions" that magically involve more taxes and control.  Apple is smart in knowing where ball is going right now.  It is on-brand for them to do this.  They are going to make damn sure they are in the Most Favored Players club on this one.  

mpschaefer said:

Marvin said:

rods5 said:

I too am waiting for a M3 iMac 27” or larger all in one Mac.  The Mac Mini is OK, but what other 27” or larger display will be good to great and not cost you a arm and a leg like the Apple Studio display @ $1,599, which is the cost of an iMac all by itself.  

And the Mac Studio starts at $1,999, plus the Studio display, brings the total to $3,598 for a entry version of the Mac Studio. 

Where is the M2 or M3 27” iMac?  I want two of them!  I am waiting!!!  What say you, Apple?

The prices aren't all that much different from before.

The earlier 27" iMac had a core-i5, 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD, Radeon 5300 for $1799.
Studio Display is $1599, Mac mini M2 is faster than a core-i9, 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD, GPU same as 5300 for $599 = $2198.

A higher-end iMac was core i9, 8GB, 512GB, 5700XT for $3199 (32GB RAM was $600 = $3799). An M2 Pro will rival a 5700XT, M2 Max will be faster.

Studio Display + M2 Pro mini = $3298 (old iMac was $3199)
Studio Display + Mac Studio (32GB RAM) = $3598 (old iMac was $3799)

If Apple made a 27" iMac again, they'd likely have an entry model with M2 mini internals at $1999.

I have long been a fan of the AIO factor but have been contemplating the switch to a Mac Mini + Studio Display combination given the pricing is not vastly different and I can then choose to independently upgrade the screen or the unit if needed.

It would just be nice for Apple to explicitly state if the 27" iMac is permanently dead or only in some HomePod temporary hiatus...

What alternative universe are you living in? Employees pay the taxes and employers dodge paying their share of taxes.
red oak said:

ionicle said:

radarthekat said:

Apple invests a tremendous amount to build out and operate a physical store.  It would seem proper that they would then have the lion's share of control over the operations that go on within that store, including authority to determine pay and benefits. 

What doesn't seem proper to me, and this is my issue with unions, is that a disproportionate amount of control should find its way into the hands of a group of people who have relatively little invested into the store or at risk with regard to the total cost of the store and its ongoing operation.  Unionized workers ability to shut down an entire store under certain conditions seems way out of proportion to their investment in the design and engineering and corporate decision and management processes required to have brought such a sophisticated operation into existence, to keep it supplied, to do all its marketing and to develop its efficient management and operations plan.  

Workers provide valuable service to an Apple Store, but that value is compensated via the pay and benefits they agreed to when they took the job. 

Perhaps I am naive (I'm sure I'll be educated here by some posters if I'm not seeing this clearly), but it just seems to me that unions sometimes wield disproportionate power relative to their contribution of required investment to establish and feed an enterprise such as an Apple Store.  

Seems to me that their right to vote with their feet, combined with the protections of the labor and workplace safety laws, is adequate balance on their side of the ledger.  

I never worked in any unionized business.  My high school diploma meant that I started out in a $6.50/hour job, in 1985, and it was through my contributions that I climbed the ladder to one day become co-founder and VP of product development of my third startup.  Perhaps this colors my views, which are that you gain the power to make changes and wield authority by moving up through the ranks.  My years of military service prior to 1985 may also have colored my view.  You get it when you earn it, not by banding together to revolt, in a manner of speaking. 

/rant

In fairness i never saw it from the other side….

from my perspective, when the boss turns up in a new mercedes s-class with all the bells and whistles then claims he cant afford to pay staff more than minimum wage… really enrages me, and makes me want to fight back, as without the workers working for minimum wage, the business would grind to a halt and he wouldnt be able to afford that car, his 5 bed detached house and acres of land or anything else, im not saying he shouldnt benefit from building a business, he absolutely should, but why should i be driving a 16 year old car, struggling to put food on the table while he changes his brand new car every year when i am one of the people making him so much money…

He should slow down his spending a bit and give us a pay rise so we can afford to live a bit more comfortably, i doubt it would hit his living standards too bad if he gave us all an extra few quid per hour….

it goes both ways, we have no union, but i feel if we did we might be able to get a better deal

It is YOUR responsibility to improve yourself and make yourself more valuable in the workforce.   Education, certificates, taking risk, working harder than the next person.   Create your own opportunities.  The owners you criticize are the ones paying 50%+ of all the taxes