Maxed-out 2017 iMac Pro is here.
Maxed-out 18-core 2017 iMac Pro
Below: this screen shot takes the entire vertical space of the iMac Pro screen. Apple really needs to rethink CPU History when there are 36 virtual cores. Perhaps a 2-column display, since there is ample screen width for history in two columns.
36 virtual cores on 2017 iMac Pro
Apple thinks its new security features are nifty.
MPG thinks that Disk Utility has bug after bug after bug. Including a bug that not only destroyed the boot volume (“Macintosh HD”) but destroyed the recovery partition.
In progress is a system restore over the internet via network recovery (hours-long process). Never in decades of using Macs have I totally hosed a machine this badly. Once hosed, it’s not even possible to boot externally—because that is turned off by default. What exactly does this not-a-bug-its-a-feature do for users?
Does Apple test anything these days? macOS Manure.
There is no way in heaven that I’m going to commit to an iMac Pro for my work given what I just experienced. I want a useful tool, not a science fair project.
MPG’s advice for any professional is to skip the iMac Pro unless its performance is a must-have for specialized work (the iMac Pro is inferior for my key tasks versus the 2017 iMac 5K). And backup frequently. The new secure enclave brings all sorts of new headaches and problems.
Update: the install is now hung in an infinite loop": “iTunes updated successfully”—Clicking just presents the same “iTunes updated successfully” dialog—10 times or 100 times or 1000 times—forever. That’s after a previous infinite loop asking whether to install iTunes (no choice, in effect). Apple Core Rot in macOS Manure. I literally had to pull the power plug. It’s unbelievable that Apple ships this untested garbage to users. After pulling the power plug, rebooting forced me through the same setup process, but luckily iTunes was now current, thus bypassing the infinite loop bug. All of this following yet another bug claiming that 80GB of user-account data would not fit on a 220GB boot volume.
Backup, peripherals, etc
Budget for peripherals as well.
Everyone should have an absolute minimum of two backups drives and preferably four: two always-attached, and two offsite. Single drives best for offsite backup (separable and multiply redundant on power supply).
The Thunderbay 4 makes an excellent “always attached” backup unit for Time Machine and clones (use the drives individually in most cases, not RAID).
Most photographers are going to need large storage like the OWC Thunderbay 4 (Thunderbolt 3 version).
To attach Mini DisplayPort display, the OWC Thunderbolt 3 Dock is best.
Back in Apple and Privacy: are there Bedrock Principles Based on Inviolable Philosophical/Moral Principles, or Rather, Concretized Pragmatic State of the Moment “whatever works” Policies?, I commented on the dubious pseudo-philosophical claims of Apple about privacy.
While I gave Apple some benefit of the doubt, the implications are now confirmed: Apple has thrown Chinese users under the bus by agreeing to store encryption keys for iCloud in China. Does anyone but a naif think the Chinese government won’t demand those keys sooner or later, and probably sooner?
I’d like Apple to formally state: “Before we turn over encryption keys to the Chinese government, we will give users 72 hours notice of that action and destroy all data (and backups) of any user that requests it”. That would show some shred of respect for the respect-for-user-privacy that Apple just loves to tout when it is convenient and makes for good PR. But Apple has made no such statement.
From Apple to Start Putting Sensitive Encryption Keys in China in the Wall Street Journal (emphasis added):
Apple says it is moving the keys to China as part of its effort to comply with a Chinese law on data storage enacted last year. Apple said it will store the keys in a secure location, retain control over them and hasn’t created any backdoors to access customer data. A spokesman in a statement added that Apple advocated against the new laws, but chose to comply because it “felt that discontinuing the [iCloud] service would result in a bad user experience and less data security and privacy for our Chinese customers.”
Apple’s move reflects the tough choice that has faced all foreign companies that want to continue offering cloud services in China since the new law. Other companies also have complied, including Microsoft Corp. for its Azure and Office 365 services, which are operated by 21Vianet Group , Inc., and Amazon.com Inc., which has cloud operating agreements with Beijing Sinnet Technology Co. and Ningxia Western Cloud Data Technology Co.
The rationalization about user privacy is stunning: note the reference to feelings ('felt') but not to facts or to moral-philosophical principles, as well as the ugly precedent it sets.
What the statement above really means is:
“We at Apple support privacy for our users as extremely important. Unless and until it impacts our bottom line.
This after Apple gave the FBI the finger as to cell phone encryption (Apple in 2016 fought a U.S. government demand to help unlock the iPhone of the gunman in the 2015 San Bernardino terrorist attack). So Apple blocks the FBI, but thinks it is just fine to comply with a repressive government with zero respect for human rights in a way that compromises millions of users. The sanctimonious irony should not be lost on anyone, anywhere. George Orwell just rolled over in his grave.
One has to wonder about the convoluted rationalizations Tim Cook must go through to avoid implosive cognitive dissonance. That is, assuming he actually does respect user privacy morally-philosophically as a conviction, versus just a nice talking point. As I see it, it is either cowardice through and through, or it’s all been a nice “fair weather” show.
Will Apple be complying with government demands in any two-bit totalitarian dictatorship as well? Where is Apple’s formal policy on such matters—why not spell it out? Still, it’s hardly necessary—the precedent has been set so the policy is clear enough.
Does Tim Cook now have any credibility on any issue involving individual rights? You can’t pick and choose which rights apply or do not apply; one either has a deep conviction that individual rights matter (the founding principle of this country), or it’s all for show. Contrary to the absurd rationalization quoted above, this is not a complex issue: supporting a repressive state where individual rights don’t matter makes Apple complicit, with Apple sanctioning a totalitarian state. No amount of honey-coated press releases change that core fact.
To quote Tim Cook:
I believe Apple has led by example, and we’re going to keep doing that.
How is Apple leading now?