madan

eji said:

Arlo users, what's your experience with these devices? Good, bad, indifferent?

I'm looking to replace a couple of EZVIZ 1080p Minis. For cheap cameras, they've worked surprisingly well, but I'd like something with a bit more placement flexibility (which the Arlo's battery power offers) and HomeKit integration.

They're the best mobile cameras on the market.  I have 7 Arlo Pros on a base station and they've been excellent purchases thus far (knock on wood).  The devices are easy to use and put up:

1.  Simply install the app on your phone/device & make an account.  2.  Connect your base station to your modem or gateway.  3.  Turn on the camera and let it "sync" to the base station.  4.  Pin the camera somewhere and customize its preferences from the menu.  

It's superior to bullet and dome cameras in the respect that you have more flexibility.  Bullet/bubble usually feed to a DVR.  The Arlos can also feed to a "DVR"-paradigm setup by simply connecting external storage to your base station (a jump drive or M.2 external works well enough).  The Arlos also store your photos on your online account so you can view them online.  This redundancy is excellent.   Because the Arlos are battery powered, you don't have to worry about the power going out.  The base station itself has a backup power source for up to 30 min. to 1 hour.  The batteries in the camera have been excellent and I get about a month of use between charges.  It takes about 2-4 hours to charge a battery.  They charge through microUSB.  The cameras are small and relatively form-unobtrusive.  Sure, they're white and eye catching (my house trim is white so it actually works), but you can hide them with silicone cases found on Amazon.  The cases come in a variety of colors and some are even ghillied or camouflaged.

The cameras have good color/recording quality and average night vision.  Motion detection is also acceptable.  It also has sound/noise detection, as well as two way talk which works surprisingly well.  The cameras are tough enough, with one of mine falling and hitting concrete from an 8 foot drop and surviving.  They're light so you can either choose to bolt them on a drilled base or simply using their magnetic base with external command strips (15 lb strips are enough).  The app software is great.  It lets you customize the camera name, its range, sensitivity and the like.  You can view past recorded videos or check in real time.  The live streaming is toggled and that's a good thing because otherwise, you'd kill your phone battery and data in a heartbeat.  The software allows you to customize certain zones of activity within a camera's field of view (for subscribers...I'm not one).  The software is quick, stable and easy to use.  Homekit support is an unnecessary bonus.

With its backup power and its wireless capabilities, the Arlos are more resistant to interference than a wired bullet/bubble system for a fraction of the price.  The Arlos have far better battery than my Ring and the software is more user-friendly (even if it has less capabilities).  The video quality is comparable but the Ring requires a subscription fee.  The Ring didn't need a base station set up but the setup on the Arlos literally only took an additional 2 minutes.  I don't have any Nest since Google has been caught mining Nest user data without approval or consent.  I've had other camera systems in the past but so far Arlos have been tops.

I hope I feel this way about them for another 2 years.  Thus far however, they've been great. Highly recommended.

dysamoria said:

Soli said:

madan said:

Remember that it's 5999 PLUS TAX and Apple Care.  With those additions, that computer almost hits 7000.  If you upgrade the RAM yourself and the storage (the measly 256 GB) yourself, you're looking at another 500 dollars MORE.  And that's BEFORE you even look at a real graphics card.  The Mac Pro's 580 is only 30% faster than the AMD APUs in higher level 3400Gs.  30% over integrated graphics isn't "powerful".  So by the time you sink another 1000+ in a Vega 2 card, you're looking at least 8500 dollars (probably closer to 9000).

And even then, you could build a Mac with 90% that performance for a quarter of the price.

What a weird statement within a thread of your weird statements. It's bad enough that you state "PLUS TAX" at all but then you put it in all caps as if this is some hidden Apple Tax that no other vendor has to apply to a purchases.

People forget to consider taxes all the time. Are you seriously taking issue with this person reminding people that taxes are something to consider?

Would you also complain about someone pointing out that $5999 is just marketing speak for $6000? It’s a known fact that this is a manipulation of perception.

Forgetting the sales tax is a trap, too, even if it’s not a marketing decision (due to variable sales tax rates).

They think I'm an Apple hater because I pointed out that the top end Mac Pro is awesome but the low end is a very poor buy and that it's targeted at high compute entities not prosumers.  The prosumer product is the iMac Pro.
I'm sitting on: 3 iMacs, my FrankenMac, 4 ipads, 2 iPhones, 2 ipods and my venerable Apple IIC (which still works) and Macbook Pro. But I've had my "Apple geek cred" pulled because I dared to compare hardware/price skus throughout Apple's lineup, or something.

MacPro said:

madan said:

melgross said:

madan said:

I'm not trying to make it hard on anyone.  But I am trying to clear things up so people know what they're getting into.  Buyers remorse sucks.  It would be a shame to spend 8k on a computer and find out that it competes unfavorably with a 5k iMac Pro.

Except that other in your own mind, it doesn’t.

?  A base Mac Pro has a slower CPU than an iMac Pro.  Fact.  It has a slower GPU.  Also fact.  It has less storage.  Also fact.  I suppose people can delude themselves if they want.  That won't change reality.

You don't want one we get it.

And you want to buy one and convince yourself that an 8 core 3 GHz Xeon married to 256 GB of storage and a 3-year midrange gpu is a "supercomputer".  Go get one.  I was just trying to help you.  Just avoid spouting nonsense about how the iMac Pro is "old" and "slower" when it has a better cpu, gpu and more storage...by default, for about 40% less money and it comes with a 5k monitor.

Soli said:

madan said:

Remember that it's 5999 PLUS TAX and Apple Care.  With those additions, that computer almost hits 7000.  If you upgrade the RAM yourself and the storage (the measly 256 GB) yourself, you're looking at another 500 dollars MORE.  And that's BEFORE you even look at a real graphics card.  The Mac Pro's 580 is only 30% faster than the AMD APUs in higher level 3400Gs.  30% over integrated graphics isn't "powerful".  So by the time you sink another 1000+ in a Vega 2 card, you're looking at least 8500 dollars (probably closer to 9000).

And even then, you could build a Mac with 90% that performance for a quarter of the price.

What a weird statement within a thread of your weird statements. It's bad enough that you state "PLUS TAX" at all but then you put it in all caps as if this is some hidden Apple Tax that no other vendor has to apply to a purchases.

Tax for a 6250 dollar system is almost 500 dollaras.  My point is that between tax and applcare you're looking at almost another 1000 dollars.  That's not weird.  That's emphasis that this system isn't intended for base-model upgraders.  7000 dollars is really the actual cost of the base Mac Pro. Not 6.

StrangeDays said:

madan said:

Luckily I live in a free country and I'm going to give advice anyways.  Judging from the replies from several posters in this thread, they may have the money to spend on this device but they certainly don't know what they're getting by buying it.

Inversely, besides not having the money for this kind of computer you likely also don't have the knowledge of why people like Macs and prefer them to cheaper DIY boxes. Hint: your point of "But I could build one for less!" has been argued perhaps ten thousand times on this very website. You have introduced zero new information. 

As for rights, no one has claimed you don't have the right to spout nonsense. Certainly it's your right to troll us with this very old trope, it just isn't very meaningful.

You don't have the slightest clue what I've been proposing.  I haven't been proposing DIY and I don't only have DIY in my house.  If you'd bother to read the whole thread and not blather on, you would have context as to what I was advising instead.

k thx bye.