New Apple iMac Pro - 18 cores, built for the pros

[stratology]

Macos Server is absolutely complete crap in an enterprise environment.

If a sysadmin uses a server intended for small to medium sized businesses in an enterprise environment, it means that the sysadmin is an idiot, not that the server is a bad product.

[stratology]

implied straw man arguments

Textbook example of a straw man argument:

Mentioning an unsupported, "hopelessly outdated" OS, <1% out of the userbase of that whole OS family, and then likening its condition to a currently still supported and actively security patched OS that was released the same year, illustrates the situation effectively.

Yes, understanding the 'date' in 'outdated' and making a connection to age can be quite difficult to understand.

[stratology]

If you'd know anything about that stuff you could at least have tried harder and pointed to something actually advanced like PowerShell, AD commandline management, clustering, NPS or any other advanced concepts.

You, once again, missed the point.
Power Shell, AD, NPS are all Microsoft technologies. They don't help differentiate between a sysadmin who only has MS specific knowledge, and one who is competent in fundamentals, like networking, DNS, etc., which are not platform specific.

[Guenon]

implied straw man arguments

Textbook example of a straw man argument:

Not when it's actually true and can be used as a valid description of what's going on in a given text

[stratology]

Not when it's actually true and can be used as a valid description of what's going on in a given text

Old technology, regardless of whether it's supported and patched, does not gain any new technology features of newer OS releases, including architectural improvements to security.

Missing out on 8 years of architectural and feature improvements is 'a valid description of what's going on', IMHO.

[Guenon]

Not when it's actually true and can be used as a valid description of what's going on in a given text

Old technology, regardless of whether it's supported and patched, does not gain any new technology features of newer OS releases, including architectural improvements to security.

Missing out on 8 years of architectural and feature improvements is 'a valid description of what's going on', IMHO.

Ah, you're talking about that. No, in this context commenting on the difference between an unsupported and a supported OS is not a straw man at all. It was merely a reply to the ideas you brought up, yourself.

The compromised systems you mentioned were not up to date, and represented 0.016% of the whole userbase of the OS family. That percentage, in turn, was a reply to the percentage you mentioned yourself, of how the (unsupported) OSX version from the same year has a <1% userbase of that respective OS family.

More importantly, however, note that this whole tangent emerged from you trying to bring it up as a separate argument, likening a still supported OS with an unsupported one while pointing at absolute numbers instead of relative, and a subset of not up to date systems as representative of a still supported OS (that didn't have the said problem when kept up to date).

See the attempted strawmanning there? And that wasn't even the specific case I was referring to.

I was thinking more about all of those "ah so you don't do [X] / ah so you do [X] when you use your system, greeeat" remarks that you throw around as lists. Remarks that imply [X], or depending on the case [not X], is the way things are, and that it's bad, and thus something is bad as a consequence of it.

See my reply to the latest one of your posts like that. But seriously. This doesn't change the main problems in Apple's policies and computer systems, mentioned in this thread, one bit.

Given those problems, and how in turn those random lists you construct contain assumptions that often aren't clear-cut or even true as a rule, or are inconsequential when put into the bigger picture (again, see my replies)... my attitude towards such implied boogeyboos is, they are straw man at their core, albeit perhaps unintentionally. As in, I admit that it may well be how you really view these things instead of just trying to argue for argument's sake in order to divert from the main problems in Apple's policies and computer systems. To me, It really really feels like the latter, though.

[Dominus]

Missing out on 8 years of architectural and feature improvements is 'a valid description of what's going on', IMHO.

[keyman_sam]

After seeing this thread and all the valid arguments made against the upcoming Apple iMac Pro, Apple have realized they've been doing it all wrong all these years. They've decided to scrap their plans for Macs and instead become a lenovo reseller on eBay.

Yay!

[fmr]

After seeing this thread and all the valid arguments made against the upcoming Apple iMac Pro, Apple have realized they've been doing it all wrong all these years. They've decided to scrap their plans for Macs and instead become a lenovo reseller on eBay.

Yay!

Except they will re-skin the Lenovos with an ultra thin aluminum case, showing a BIG Apple logo, add some special chips that only allow their special version of the OS to run, and double the price, of course.

And they will create new versions of the OS every year, to "upgrade" the machines, and every three year the oldest versions will stop to be supported. The newest versions of the OS will introduce new "features" that will render obsolete the models that are more than five years old.

Users that refuse to upgrade will be burned in public fires, under the accusation of heresy.

[Zexila]

Except they will re-skin the Lenovos with an ultra thin aluminum case, showing a BIG Apple logo, add some special chips that only allow their special version of the OS to run, and double the price, of course.

And they will create new versions of the OS every year, to "upgrade" the machines, and every three year the oldest versions will stop to be supported. The newest versions of the OS will introduce new "features" that will render obsolete the models that are more than five years old.

Users that refuse to upgrade will be burned in public fires, under the accusation of heresy.

Spot on.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

...every three year the oldest versions will stop to be supported. The newest versions of the OS will introduce new "features" that will render obsolete the models that are more than five years old.

These Mac models are compatible with macOS Sierra:

MacBook (Late 2009 or newer)
MacBook Pro (Mid 2010 or newer)
MacBook Air (Late 2010 or newer)
Mac mini (Mid 2010 or newer)
iMac (Late 2009 or newer)
Mac Pro (Mid 2010 or newer)

[fmr]

...every three year the oldest versions will stop to be supported. The newest versions of the OS will introduce new "features" that will render obsolete the models that are more than five years old.

These Mac models are compatible with macOS Sierra:

MacBook (Late 2009 or newer)
MacBook Pro (Mid 2010 or newer)
MacBook Air (Late 2010 or newer)
Mac mini (Mid 2010 or newer)
iMac (Late 2009 or newer)
Mac Pro (Mid 2010 or newer)

I was being sarcastic (apparently, it didn't pass very well), hence the hyperbole

Anyway, one thing is being "compatible" another is being able to "really" work with it. I have an iMac from 2011, so, I can compare how OS X 10.9 runs in it compared with OS X 10.12 (I have both installed)

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

...every three year the oldest versions will stop to be supported. The newest versions of the OS will introduce new "features" that will render obsolete the models that are more than five years old.

These Mac models are compatible with macOS Sierra:

MacBook (Late 2009 or newer)
MacBook Pro (Mid 2010 or newer)
MacBook Air (Late 2010 or newer)
Mac mini (Mid 2010 or newer)
iMac (Late 2009 or newer)
Mac Pro (Mid 2010 or newer)

I was being sarcastic (apparently, it didn't pass very well), hence the hyperbole

Anyway, one thing is being "compatible" another is being able to "really" work with it. I have an iMac from 2011, so, I can compare how OS X 10.9 runs in it compared with OS X 10.12 (I have both installed)

Your post started off sarcastically enough, but the part I quoted was close enough to the truth that you might has well have chosen to tell it, as opposed to just muddying the waters

I got seven years smooth running out of my first Macbook Pro, and I swear it would still be running well if it weren't for a water 'incident'. Everything ran perfectly fine up till the point it died, still letting me make music, game, encode video etc.

Current laptop is five years old (I bought it at the two-year point), and runs both 'Yosemite' and 'Sierra' with zero issues. In fact, 'Sierra', combined with and SSD, and 16g ram, is the smoothest computer experience I have ever had.

So, there's that.

[chk071]

...every three year the oldest versions will stop to be supported. The newest versions of the OS will introduce new "features" that will render obsolete the models that are more than five years old.

These Mac models are compatible with macOS Sierra:

MacBook (Late 2009 or newer)
MacBook Pro (Mid 2010 or newer)
MacBook Air (Late 2010 or newer)
Mac mini (Mid 2010 or newer)
iMac (Late 2009 or newer)
Mac Pro (Mid 2010 or newer)

These devices are totally outdated. According to this thread.

[stratology]

I got seven years smooth running out of my first Macbook Pro

I still have a 12" PowerBook G4 from 2004 that, apart from a depleted battery, runs as well as on the day of purchase.