Think about it for a moment: you get a decent computer with solid performance, with an incredible screen, a great software ecosystem (from both Unix and Mac) and a very nice OS to run everything.

You can't build a Dell to match that, even if you rip Windows out and install Linux or a BSD.

Think about it for a moment: 5 years ago you could have gotten more for the same price, relative to the GPU and compute power at the time.

Of course you can't build a Dell to match that. The point is this is less of a computer for the longevity that the Mid 2012 Mac Pro originally priced at $2,499 provided. (Guess what, the Apple Thunderbolt Display then was also priced at only $999.) Why in the hell would I pay twice that, for a computer I can't use for twice the lifespan? There are _still_ people selling their Mid 2012 Mac Pros for a large fraction of the original price.

But, no you're right, it's totally acceptable that Apple's only VR-capable machine is $5,000 to produce VR content that no one on the Mac platform can use.

Genius.

It all depends on how much you need compute power on your desk. This is a reasonable computer. It's not the absolute fastest thing you could build or buy. It's not an 224-core octa-socket Xeon Platinum box with 16 Titan V cards and 24 TB of RAM.

Provided you don't go for the lowest spec one, it's probably more than enough to cover most needs of most power users for the next 5 years or so. Even if you go for the low-spec one, it'll be fairly decent 5 years from now just like my aging MacBook Pro is.