Last Active
  • Apple's new 16-inch MacBook Pro is built to blaze through pro workflows

    You can connect two Pro Display XDRs to this machine:

    "Up to two displays with 6016‑by‑3384 resolution at 60Hz at over a billion colors"

    EDIT: Somehow I missed that info in the article. Or Dan is updating it "in real time" as it were.

    Anyhow, this is great news and I will buy one with an XDR display early next year.
  • macOS 10.15.1 suggests 16-inch MacBook Pro has discrete Touch ID

    Just FYI, if you go looking for the likely processors in a re-architected "Pro" MacBook -- the obvious choices are the eight-core Xeon E-2286M and six-core Xeon E-2276M. They've been launched by Intel and HP has the E-2286M as an option for their ZBook 15 G6 (sixth-generation) mobile workstations, with pricing around $4000 for 32GB RAM with the best graphics and the top-end display.

    They don't yet offer the E-2276M but if the fifth-generation is any indication, it will be about $400 less than the E-2286M.
  • HBO Max to take on Apple TV+ in May 2020 [u]

    Can someone explain the difference between HBO Now and HBO Max? Is it going to have more exclusive content that HBO Go/Tv channel won't have?
    Edit: Thought the answers were (1) there will be no difference and (2) yes, but not sure now. I mean, they are all the same price, so I think it will probably replace both Go and Now.
    curtis hannah
  • Editorial: Will Apple's $6k+ Mac Pro require brainwash marketing to sell?

    I'll guess the reason Apple felt they could get away with the Z8 comparison in the keynote is that it was the only one that supported ECC memory at the time. It wasn't until July that HP started selling the Z6 with ECC. Also, the Z8 is the only one that can carry more than two graphics cards. Yes, the Z6 is a better comparison because you can get it with the single-processor Xeon-W like the Mac Pro, while the Z8 doesn't support that. But in other ways the Z8 was a better match. So they went that direction with it...
  • Editorial: Will Apple's $6k+ Mac Pro require brainwash marketing to sell?

    danvm said:
    avon b7 said:

    madan said:
    At its 6000 USD base price tag, the computer is a joke. [...]

    You could build a DIY computer with pretty much identical performance for less than 1500 dollars.  No, I'm not kidding.
    Not kidding, just ignorant. Please post your $1500 DIY version of equal performance. Then add additional cost for assembly, and support, which your DIY model doesn't have.
    He made his point extremely clearly. He repeated the logic behind it several times but you still ignore it and label him as arrogant into the bargain?

    He concludes, in his opinion, that the base configuration is extremely overpriced for what you get. His posts were to inform and highlighted (occasionally robustly) why
    he thinks that way. I think most people considering a purchase would be thankful for the opinion (independently of what they eventually do).

    He spelt things out in a perfectly acceptable manner. I wouldn't call that arrogant in any shape or form.

    When you filter out the 'noise' from this thread, there isn't much (if anything) that truly counters the information he has put forward in a convincing way.

    From my perspective, which is purely to watch the discussion and then weigh things up myself, I'm grateful for him voicing his opinion. Unless someone brings something to the table to counter his view on the technical and bang for buck aspects, I'll lean in his direction on this.

    Well, no one has brought up the fact that you can price the same set of components on the HP site and pay about the same or slightly more.

    So he’s basically saying a DIY person can do better, but the reality is anyone buying from HP or Apple or any other quality manufacturer is going to pay about what Apple is charging.
    The difference is that with HP (same as Lenovo and Dell) you can choose a mid range - low end model with the same specs.  For example, I configured a HP Z4 with the same specs as the entry Mac Pro, the cost is $4540.00, with the included 3-yr warranty with onsite service.   The HP is $1500.00 less than a Mac Pro without Apple Care.  The HP Z6 has a similar pricing.  
    From what I remember, in the keynote Apple showed a comparison with the HP Z8.  IMO, that's a wrong comparison, since the Z8 is in another league, considering is supports dual Xeon Scalable procesors (up 56-cores) and 3TB of RAM.  That's the good thing of having options, like HP, Dell and Lenovo does.  
    You're fudging your numbers here, because that is a sale price as HP clears the last-generation Skylake processors in preparation for the next generation. The list price is still $6965, the same as it was when the Mac Pro was announced in June (link to my comment). Z4s with the next-generation Xeon-W that will be in the base Mac Pro will be priced around that same point. They won't be on sale!

    That doesn't negate the point that HP offers lower-tier "prosumer" towers that Apple does not -- it just negates what you've just said here. It also doesn't negate madan's basic point, which he could easily have made without bringing his DIY numbers into it. It only illustrates that his DIY numbers are bullshit and in the real world even the base configuration of the Mac Pro is a decent deal. It's just that the iMac Pro and the iMac are even better deals.

    EDIT: Just wanted to add that Intel's pricing has dropped by half for this next generation, due to actual competition for the first time in a long time. I think Apple knew this when they priced the Mac Pro, but the old HP list price discussed above doesn't reflect it -- so subtract around half of the processor price, maybe $1000 or so? So the equivalent Z4 and the Mac Pro will be priced nearly the same...