Well, Apple did finally deliver on an "xMac" -esque desktop:
price points are $2K (M1 Max) and $4K (M1 Ultra).

Performance-wise, the Max is 2.5X faster than faster (i9)
based 27-inc iMac ; the Ultra comes in at 1.8x of the
highest performing Mac Pro.

For displays, the new one is a 27" 5K "Studio Display", at
$1600 ... comes with VESA or a Tilt-adjustable stand; an
"also available" Tilt & height adjustable stand is +$400.

Looks pretty killer. Time to start saving the pennies.

-hh

On 2022-03-08 11:12 a.m., -hh wrote:
>
> Well, Apple did finally deliver on an "xMac" -esque desktop:
> price points are $2K (M1 Max) and $4K (M1 Ultra).
>
> Performance-wise, the Max is 2.5X faster than faster (i9)
> based 27-inc iMac ; the Ultra comes in at 1.8x of the
> highest performing Mac Pro.
>
> For displays, the new one is a 27" 5K "Studio Display", at
> $1600 ... comes with VESA or a Tilt-adjustable stand; an
> "also available" Tilt & height adjustable stand is +$400.
>
> Looks pretty killer. Time to start saving the pennies.

Yup.

It's got no impact on me personally, but I've got a few clients who will
be very interested.

On 3/8/22 11:12 AM, -hh wrote:
>
> Well, Apple did finally deliver on an "xMac" -esque desktop:
> price points are $2K (M1 Max) and $4K (M1 Ultra).
>
> Performance-wise, the Max is 2.5X faster than faster (i9)
> based 27-inc iMac ; the Ultra comes in at 1.8x of the
> highest performing Mac Pro.
>
> For displays, the new one is a 27" 5K "Studio Display", at
> $1600 ... comes with VESA or a Tilt-adjustable stand; an
> "also available" Tilt & height adjustable stand is +$400.
>
> Looks pretty killer. Time to start saving the pennies.
>
>
> -hh

Was wanting a new 27 iMac. As of today they are gone forever. In
reality though the Mac Studio is much better and the way to go.

On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 2:12:15 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
> Well, Apple did finally deliver on an "xMac" -esque desktop:
> price points are $2K (M1 Max) and $4K (M1 Ultra).
>
> Performance-wise, the Max is 2.5X faster than faster (i9)
> based 27-inc iMac ; the Ultra comes in at 1.8x of the
> highest performing Mac Pro.
>
> For displays, the new one is a 27" 5K "Studio Display", at
> $1600 ... comes with VESA or a Tilt-adjustable stand; an
> "also available" Tilt & height adjustable stand is +$400.
>
> Looks pretty killer. Time to start saving the pennies.
>
>
> -hh
It's a smart move since the Mac towers are so expensive. Still they would sell way more if them if they were $1500 instead of $2,000 and $4,000. Apple is now officially less evil than Google, but more evil than Microsoft.

On 2022-03-23 2:06 p.m., MuahMan wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 2:12:15 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
>> Well, Apple did finally deliver on an "xMac" -esque desktop:
>> price points are $2K (M1 Max) and $4K (M1 Ultra).
>>
>> Performance-wise, the Max is 2.5X faster than faster (i9)
>> based 27-inc iMac ; the Ultra comes in at 1.8x of the
>> highest performing Mac Pro.
>>
>> For displays, the new one is a 27" 5K "Studio Display", at
>> $1600 ... comes with VESA or a Tilt-adjustable stand; an
>> "also available" Tilt & height adjustable stand is +$400.
>>
>> Looks pretty killer. Time to start saving the pennies.
>>
>>
>> -hh
> It's a smart move since the Mac towers are so expensive. Still they would sell way more if them if they were $1500 instead of $2,000 and $4,000. Apple is now officially less evil than Google, but more evil than Microsoft.

"Evil" for doing what, exactly?

On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 5:06:43 PM UTC-4, MuahMan wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 2:12:15 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
> > Well, Apple did finally deliver on an "xMac" -esque desktop:
> > price points are $2K (M1 Max) and $4K (M1 Ultra).
> >
> > Performance-wise, the Max is 2.5X faster than faster (i9)
> > based 27-inc iMac ; the Ultra comes in at 1.8x of the
> > highest performing Mac Pro.
> >
> > For displays, the new one is a 27" 5K "Studio Display", at
> > $1600 ... comes with VESA or a Tilt-adjustable stand; an
> > "also available" Tilt & height adjustable stand is +$400.
> >
> > Looks pretty killer. Time to start saving the pennies.
>
>
> It's a smart move since the Mac towers are so expensive.

This one is a third of the cost of the prior.

> Still they would sell way more if them if they were $1500 instead
> of $2,000 and $4,000.

Porsche would sell more 911’s if they only cost $1500 too…but that
doesn’t mean that they’re profitable for the company at that price.

> Apple is now officially less evil than Google, but more evil than Microsoft.

Brian, you’re always finding a way to make sure that you say something stupid
so that no one takes you seriously…and you’ve done just so once again.

-hh

On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 6:44:26 PM UTC-4, Alan wrote:
> On 2022-03-23 2:06 p.m., MuahMan wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 2:12:15 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
> >> Well, Apple did finally deliver on an "xMac" -esque desktop:
> >> price points are $2K (M1 Max) and $4K (M1 Ultra).
> >>
> >> Performance-wise, the Max is 2.5X faster than faster (i9)
> >> based 27-inc iMac ; the Ultra comes in at 1.8x of the
> >> highest performing Mac Pro.
> >>
> >> For displays, the new one is a 27" 5K "Studio Display", at
> >> $1600 ... comes with VESA or a Tilt-adjustable stand; an
> >> "also available" Tilt & height adjustable stand is +$400.
> >>
> >> Looks pretty killer. Time to start saving the pennies.
> >>
> >>
> >> -hh
> > It's a smart move since the Mac towers are so expensive. Still they would sell way more if them if they were $1500 instead of $2,000 and $4,000. Apple is now officially less evil than Google, but more evil than Microsoft.
> "Evil" for doing what, exactly?
Ahhh I dunno. Just old biases. Google is awful, Apple and MSFT have both taken steps to protect privacy while Google has gone the other direction. I wish their stuff was more reasonably priced and it's still harder to troubleshoot issues on it than a Windows box. With Windows 11, OS X and Windows act more alike than different now. I may try a Studio (the cheaper one). Does it run Adobe stuff natively?

On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 7:38:23 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 5:06:43 PM UTC-4, MuahMan wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 2:12:15 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
> > > Well, Apple did finally deliver on an "xMac" -esque desktop:
> > > price points are $2K (M1 Max) and $4K (M1 Ultra).
> > >
> > > Performance-wise, the Max is 2.5X faster than faster (i9)
> > > based 27-inc iMac ; the Ultra comes in at 1.8x of the
> > > highest performing Mac Pro.
> > >
> > > For displays, the new one is a 27" 5K "Studio Display", at
> > > $1600 ... comes with VESA or a Tilt-adjustable stand; an
> > > "also available" Tilt & height adjustable stand is +$400.
> > >
> > > Looks pretty killer. Time to start saving the pennies.
> >
> >
> > It's a smart move since the Mac towers are so expensive.
> This one is a third of the cost of the prior.
> > Still they would sell way more if them if they were $1500 instead
> > of $2,000 and $4,000.
> Porsche would sell more 911’s if they only cost $1500 too…but that
> doesn’t mean that they’re profitable for the company at that price.
> > Apple is now officially less evil than Google, but more evil than Microsoft.
> Brian, you’re always finding a way to make sure that you say something stupid
> so that no one takes you seriously…and you’ve done just so once again.
>
> -hh
Not even trying to be argumentative. LOL I mean without knowing I'm guessing their margins on that are 50% or higher. I don't need the power of their $10-15K towers, those are highly specialized, but I do need the power of the Studio. The low-end one should be $1500 and the high-end one should be $2500, and I should get a 1TB drive in both. I'd buy one tomorrow at that price, but when you hit $3-$4k... Just seems too much and too much of a risk to try. Assuming they have some sort of assembly line why not just crank out more and sell two times as many.

Porsche comparison is lame. Driving a Turbo - S would give me an orgasm. No computer will ever do that. :)

MuahMan <muahman@gmail.com> wrote in
news:1b2ab653-1c92-47bc-8268-ed983fee1ea3n@googlegroups.com:

> On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 7:38:23 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
>> On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 5:06:43 PM UTC-4, MuahMan wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 2:12:15 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
>> > > Well, Apple did finally deliver on an "xMac" -esque desktop:
>> > > price points are $2K (M1 Max) and $4K (M1 Ultra).
>> > >
>> > > Performance-wise, the Max is 2.5X faster than faster (i9)
>> > > based 27-inc iMac ; the Ultra comes in at 1.8x of the
>> > > highest performing Mac Pro.
>> > >
>> > > For displays, the new one is a 27" 5K "Studio Display", at
>> > > $1600 ... comes with VESA or a Tilt-adjustable stand; an
>> > > "also available" Tilt & height adjustable stand is +$400.
>> > >
>> > > Looks pretty killer. Time to start saving the pennies.
>> >
>> >
>> > It's a smart move since the Mac towers are so expensive.
>> This one is a third of the cost of the prior.
>> > Still they would sell way more if them if they were $1500 instead
>> > of $2,000 and $4,000.
>> Porsche would sell more 911’s if they only cost $1500 too�
> �but that
>> doesn’t mean that they’re profitable for the company at t
> hat price.
>> > Apple is now officially less evil than Google, but more evil than
>> > Micro
> soft.
>> Brian, you’re always finding a way to make sure that you say some
> thing stupid
>> so that no one takes you seriously…and you’ve done just s
> o once again.
>>
>> -hh
> Not even trying to be argumentative. LOL I mean without knowing I'm
> guessing their margins on that are 50% or higher. I don't need the
> power of their $10-15K towers, those are highly specialized, but I do
> need the power of the Studio. The low-end one should be $1500 and the
> high-end one should be $2500, and I should get a 1TB drive in both.
> I'd buy one tomorrow at that price, but when you hit $3-$4k... Just
> seems too much and too much of a risk to try. Assuming they have
> some sort of assembly line why not just crank out more and sell two
> times as many.
>
> Porsche comparison is lame. Driving a Turbo - S would give me an
> orgasm. No computer will ever do that. :)
>

Don't waste your time replying to the hh troll. He will drive you crazy
changing the topic, moving the goal posts and quoting pages of not
applicable statistics.
The hh is a waste of your time.
Send him to the bozo bin and move on.

On 2022-03-23 5:21 p.m., MuahMan wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 6:44:26 PM UTC-4, Alan wrote:
>> On 2022-03-23 2:06 p.m., MuahMan wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 2:12:15 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
>>>> Well, Apple did finally deliver on an "xMac" -esque desktop:
>>>> price points are $2K (M1 Max) and $4K (M1 Ultra).
>>>>
>>>> Performance-wise, the Max is 2.5X faster than faster (i9) based
>>>> 27-inc iMac ; the Ultra comes in at 1.8x of the highest
>>>> performing Mac Pro.
>>>>
>>>> For displays, the new one is a 27" 5K "Studio Display", at
>>>> $1600 ... comes with VESA or a Tilt-adjustable stand; an "also
>>>> available" Tilt & height adjustable stand is +$400.
>>>>
>>>> Looks pretty killer. Time to start saving the pennies.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -hh
>>> It's a smart move since the Mac towers are so expensive. Still
>>> they would sell way more if them if they were $1500 instead of
>>> $2,000 and $4,000. Apple is now officially less evil than Google,
>>> but more evil than Microsoft.
>> "Evil" for doing what, exactly?

> Ahhh I dunno. Just old biases. Google is awful, Apple and MSFT have
> both taken steps to protect privacy while Google has gone the other
> direction. I wish their stuff was more reasonably priced and it's
> still harder to troubleshoot issues on it than a Windows box.

But based on my extensive experience support both Mac and Windows users,
I can tell you that it almost never needs troubleshooting...

....at least by comparison.

With
> Windows 11, OS X and Windows act more alike than different now.

Riiiiiiiiiiight.

> I
> may try a Studio (the cheaper one). Does it run Adobe stuff
> natively?

In this (at least), Google is your friend:

<https://helpx.adobe.com/download-install/kb/apple-silicon-m1-chip.html>

On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 8:34:21 PM UTC-4, MuahMan wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 7:38:23 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
> > On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 5:06:43 PM UTC-4, MuahMan wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 2:12:15 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
> > > > Well, Apple did finally deliver on an "xMac" -esque desktop:
> > > > price points are $2K (M1 Max) and $4K (M1 Ultra).
> > > >
> > > > Performance-wise, the Max is 2.5X faster than faster (i9)
> > > > based 27-inc iMac ; the Ultra comes in at 1.8x of the
> > > > highest performing Mac Pro.
> > > >
> > > > For displays, the new one is a 27" 5K "Studio Display", at
> > > > $1600 ... comes with VESA or a Tilt-adjustable stand; an
> > > > "also available" Tilt & height adjustable stand is +$400.
> > > >
> > > > Looks pretty killer. Time to start saving the pennies.
> > >
> > >
> > > It's a smart move since the Mac towers are so expensive.
> >
> > This one is a third of the cost of the prior.
> >
> > > Still they would sell way more if them if they were $1500 instead
> > > of $2,000 and $4,000.
> >
> > Porsche would sell more 911’s if they only cost $1500 too…but that
> > doesn’t mean that they’re profitable for the company at that price.
> >
> > > Apple is now officially less evil than Google, but more evil than Microsoft.
> >
> > Brian, you’re always finding a way to make sure that you say something stupid
> > so that no one takes you seriously…and you’ve done just so once again.
>
> Not even trying to be argumentative. LOL I mean without knowing I'm guessing
> their margins on that are 50% or higher. I don't need the power of their $10-15K
> towers, those are highly specialized, but I do need the power of the Studio.

I'm probably going to pick one up too. I'm currently straddling the old Cheesegrater
and a base M1 mini for desktops... the latter mostly to modernize and risk-reduction
and I'm expecting to drop for an M1 Max Studio ... don't need the Ultra for my photo
centric use case.

> The low-end one should be $1500 and the high-end one should be $2500, ...

And it shouldn't cost $3K for a rebuild a 915 transmission, but as prices go up,
one does have to pick your fights.

> ...and I should get a 1TB drive in both.

1TB is the minimum I'd choose for a boot drive today. For 2TB, Apple's currently
asking +$400 for the bump from 1TB which is almost tempting ... comes down
to the question of if the base Studio will be good for today but you want to add
some future-proofing, does one choose to spend more in cores, RAM or SSD?
Case in point:
24 GPU's to 32 GPU's = +$200
32GB to 64GB RAM = +$400
1TB SSD to 2TB SSD = +$400

The 'scope creep' temptation/dilemma is that its +$1K to buy all three.

> I'd buy one tomorrow at that price, but when you hit $3-$4k... Just seems
> too much and too much of a risk to try.

> Assuming they have some sort of assembly line why not just crank out
> more and sell two times as many.

Same applies for why there's no new cars available for sale for $1500 today
either: its costs them more to make it than the price you're asking for.

> Porsche comparison is lame. Driving a Turbo - S would give me an orgasm.
> No computer will ever do that. :)

The fun rides these days are in the electrics with gobs of torque.

In any event, an old aircooled 911 is very much an "analog" pre-digital age
experience and the resale prices have been strong Depending how cherry
you want, one can easily figure $50K minimum for a "mundane" 3.2 Carrera
and for a Turbo of similar era, figure triple that.

Case in point, a Turbo active now on BaT:

<https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1991-porsche-964-turbo-3-3/>
Current Bid: $185,000

Meantime, I got a chance to talk with Lake Underwood Jr last fall, and
heard his story about driving in NYC in his father's '57 356 Speedster
and had some GT4 youngin's pull up alongside and try to harass him
for driving a "fake!" (replica). Here's a online pic of the car from awhile
ago that shows off its color pretty well:

<https://www.facebook.com/GreenwichConcours/photos/lake-underwoods-speedster/1802180486480630/>

-hh