polymnia

I made the jump to mesh last year and the Velop was on my short list of contenders. I ended up going with the Amplifi in the end. I liked the screen that allows updates to be applied with a few touches of the screen, rather than digging out an app. Also, the Velop was hard to get, or maybe delayed when I wanted to make the upgrade.

Reason for needing mesh (since the haters love to nerdsplain to people why they don't need mesh technology): I bought an empty lot adjacent to my home several years ago (during the housing bubble bursting, the lot was cheaper than a nice used car) and have since built up lots of gardens and spend more and more time there through the summer. The downside was my AirPort Extreme Base Station wouldn't reach the areas I spend my time there. Combine that with all the great outdoor nerd gear I'm interested in using, and I needed to upgrade the coverage of my network.

I wonder if the Velop ends up being the anointed successor, if Apple will somehow bless them to offer special abilities. Siri? Airplay?

lkrupp said:

darren mccoy said:

I don't care if every CPU is compromised.. I still want a replacement or a refund.

Then lawyer up, dude. Wanting and getting are not related.

That, and...

hopefully you you have some evidence that a task you did easily yesterday is seriously impeded tomorrow. 

My Mac is working just fine. 

If this bug does go back years, and none of you have noticed yet, what is the big deal? If you don’t want to sacrifice the performance, don’t apply the patch. Wait until you get a new Mac with a new chip to update. The sky hasn’t fallen in the years this flaw has existed. Probably sill stay up there going forward. 

Hell hath no fury like a herd of nerds whipped into a self-righteous frenzy. 

mikethemartian said:

lkrupp said:

VRing said:

lkrupp said:

AppleInsider said:

Customers who can afford its $4,999 pricetag may now be able to find the 8-core base model of the iMac Pro in some U.S. Apple stores, ready for pickup.

Why do we keep with the narrative that this machine might be purchased by common users? Why do we keep mentioning the price? The real professional who makes a living with a machine like this one will pay the price. And it’s not too expensive when you consider what’s inside the beast. I’m surprised AI or someone else hasn’t priced out a PC with the exact same specs and 5K monitor, if such an animal even exists. 

You can't price out the exact same specs.  The CPU and GPU are down clocked versions of their off the shelf counterparts. 

For example, the Vega 64 iMac Pro is outputting about the same TFLOPS as the off the shelf Vega 56. So it's not going to be a tit-for-tat comparison.

If you want to price out a DIY desktop, you can easily build a better one for less than the iMac Pro.

Pre-built computers become a bit more complicated, again, because of the availability of parts and the fact the iMac Pro is using weaker components.

Oh, and a “professional” is going build a DYI with off the self parts? How productive and cost effective would that be? As for your claim that you can ‘easily’ build a better one for less, that tripe has been debunked many times by people who have tried and failed to do it. There is no Apple ‘tax’ on this machine at this level. 

You assume everyone with hpc requirements is a high paid “professional”. There is a large number of graduate students in engineering and scientific computing that conduct important research in their fields that don’t make a lot of money or have big work budgets. This research requires far more computing power than is required by many high paid “professionals” in other fields. I was under the impression that at one time Apple had a strong interest in supporting and being involved in university research but maybe I was wrong.

Are you honestly making the argument that computing power is too expensive to conduct science? The graduate student of today has computing power in his/her iPhone that wasn't available in supercomputers their parents may have used in college. There are lots of problems these days, economic & otherwise, but the price of computing power is not one of them. The delta between the Hackintosh & the real deal iMac Pro price is insignificant to what this kind of performance cost in ANY form 5 years ago versus today.

Anyone 5 years ago would have (and did) pay much more than $5k for the power available in an iMac Pro. And graduate students did their computer science work.

Apple is certainly interested in supplying computing to students doing research, but I don't think they are interested in being the low cost solution. They also aren't trying to be the bleeding edge performance solution. They are doing roughly what they've always done. They are above-average priced machines using proven (and presumably reliable) technology that can be manufactured at scale and supported at a high level. It's been working for 30 years. The same arguments against it have been floated that whole time.

If you think about it, the tired arguments about Macs being too expensive and not cutting edge enough are old enough that they are probably beginning to go gray around the temples.