chia

VRing said:

If you want a monitor as filler, maybe the Dell UP2718Q is a good option. Lower resolution, but local dimming (384 zones), faster response and excellent color reproduction/accuracy. That won't be too useful if you're doing CAD work or coding, so you might prefer multiple displays at lower cost.

Building a PC is not like building a car, that's just an absurd comparison.

The monitor is not filler, it's an essential part of the comparison if you're comparing like with like.
The iMac Pro is a computer with a display of a particular standard; the comparison is only valid if you build a system which does at least the same as the iMac Pro you are comparing it too.  Your build isn't the same when it lacks the display.
It is the same reason why your build needs to have Thunderbolt 3, to enable it to connect to Thunderbolt 3 devices, otherwise it lacks functionality when compared to the iMac Pro.

It seems you've failed to comprehend my analogy that buying a car you can just drive away (iMac Pro) is not the same as a car you have to assemble yourself (your DIY computer).  You've also failed to comprehend that your kit is incomplete until it does the same as the ready to use equipment: if the buyer still needs to source an engine etc after assembling their kit then it's not in the same state of readiness as the new car you can just drive away with from the showroom.

Oh and for the record, Thunderbolt 3 is 40 Gb/s compared to USB 3.1 Gen2 maximum of 10 Gb/s.
It's odd how you consider the slower USB 3.1 inferior to the fastest Thunderbolt 3.  That's what I call absurd.

VRing said:

$5000 will do much better than the entry iMac Pro.

That leaves $2000 to budget on a display, OS, keyboard and mouse.

The display preference will vary depending on the industry and use case for this machine. You might need a display with high color accuracy/reproduction or you might need multiple displays, etc.

You aren't making a comparison if you're comparing an iMac Pro that's ready to use straight out of the box with an incomplete system that can't be used without a monitor.  Do us the courtesy of doing a complete job by adding the monitor and other accessories at least as good as those of the iMac Pro so that we have a usable system.

Your lacking comparison is tantamount to telling somebody about to buy and drive away a new car "I can get this for you cheaper", then showing them a kit car and declaring "see, this is much cheaper if you build it yourself, just choose what engine, seats, wheels and tires you want with your kit car".

VRing said:

Thunderbolt 3 isn't nearly that important when you have a motherboard with that much expansion and 64 PCIe lanes.

2x 10 Gb/s Ethernet can be added for $175 extra in the PCIe x1 slot, which might not be needed.

The display is left out because it gives the option to choose a display or multiple displays that best suite your needs.

You seem to be shirking out of the responsibility of choosing a suitable display to make your system equivalent in the comparison with the iMac Pro.

If there was an iMac Pro in the workplace that needed to be replaced and you told the boss “I can get the equivalent for cheaper”, you’d be expected to get everything so that the equivalent system is immediately usable, not plonk a box on the desk and tell the boss “go choose a monitor you like”. Also as you are comparing, the monitor should be at least as good as the display on the iMac Pro, otherwise you’re not comparing like with like.

Another thing with the workplace scenario is that Thunderbolt 3 will be very useful for quickly detaching and attaching external drive arrays from an old faulty machine and to the new replacement. With PCI storage you’re limited to how many slots and the physical size within the computer’s case. There’s also the harassment of opening and unplugging the cards should anything go wrong with that computer.
Thunderbolt 3 removes those limitations.

Dracarys said:

spheric said:

Dracarys said:

MS Office is the best suite out there when it comes to productivity. There's a reason why it's the most used by far.

Reason #1: lack of options twenty years ago. 
Reason #2: entrenchment in business environments. 

The last good version of Office was Word 5.1a for Mac. Ca. 1991. 

Today, Office is being used less and less. 

Office suites for Mac were pretty awful until recently. On Windows they're pretty good though. 

Word, Excel and PowerPoint started life as Macintosh programs before Microsoft later ported them to run on Microsoft Windows.
Consequently, subsequent Mac editions of those Office programs being sub par to their Windows equivalents are due to the attention Microsoft chose to give them.

appex said:

A real computer? Get a Mac! Apple should make a Mac tablet.

If you truly needed or even wanted a Mac tablet, you would have bought a ModBook Pro already.
http://www.modbook.com/modbookpro

The mass demand for such a device just isn’t there: Apple is better off focusing its resources on delivering and improving upon the products people want.