401–410 of 731 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Note that if OP expects anything like the "real" Visual Studio that runs on Windows, this is really nothing compared to it. I'd even go further and actually prefer Vscode with the right extensions compared to this "Visual Studio".
sounds like when we try to run iTunes on Windows - each competitor is intentionally crapping on the other's users
- decent design; no gamer laptops, blinking led monstrosities, etc. for me. - decent performance; I'm an engineer. I actually lose time when things run slowly. Lots of time. Kills my flow and I bill a premium rate. - decent screen. I look at this thing for the better part of a day. Also, I dabble with photography once in a while and occasionally some frontend stuff. So, HDPI/250 dpi or better. - Decent ssd storage. I…
Besides some of the led bling I find gaming laptops work pretty well as work machines (and some are toned down so much, they’re not embarrassing for adults). I also know a couple professionals that use them as their main machines (one does ed visualizations so the gpu..) They tend to have lots of ports including wired Ethernet. Have great performance. Decent video cards. Are somewhat fixable/ upgradable. Downside is…
It also runs Linux great.
- Hardware kill switches, to disable mic & camera. - Hardware kill switches for both the bluetooth radio and the built-in wifi adapter. - Needs to look good at 1024x768 resolution (I only code at that resolution, because although large resolutions are great, I have to put in extra effort to see code at higher resolutions) - Built in camera cover that slides closed, which, alongside a kill switch gives me extra peace…
> I only code at that resolution, because although large resolutions are great, I have to put in extra effort to see code at higher resolutions You can increase font size on the system, without using a low resolution.
With a low resolution, my productivity goes through the roof. Zoomed in text just doesn't cut it
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Visual Studio and Visual Studio Code are completely different things. VSC can do a subset of what VS can do, but some people really need the full power of a traditional IDE. VS vs VSC is like the difference between a smartphone camera and a full camera platform. You can rig up an iPhone (VSC) to do everything a D6 (VS) can do, but it won't be as usable.
But Visual Studio 2019 is available for mac.
If you want to make Windows apps, it just doesn't support that scenario.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Note that if OP expects anything like the "real" Visual Studio that runs on Windows, this is really nothing compared to it. I'd even go further and actually prefer Vscode with the right extensions compared to this "Visual Studio".
sounds like when we try to run iTunes on Windows - each competitor is intentionally crapping on the other's users
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Visual Studio and Visual Studio Code are completely different things. VSC can do a subset of what VS can do, but some people really need the full power of a traditional IDE. VS vs VSC is like the difference between a smartphone camera and a full camera platform. You can rig up an iPhone (VSC) to do everything a D6 (VS) can do, but it won't be as usable.
But Visual Studio 2019 is available for mac.
The other vital thing is a non-touch matte/anti-glare screen. I want to look at my code, not myself.
Of course there's heaps more I'll be comparing when choosing a machine, but if the above aren't met I won't be looking at that machine.
> if I'm missing on any new developments since 2015 Yes, you missed something huge. Apple Silicon M1 or nothing. It's just too good. Low power consumption allows the laptop to actually be used as a laptop. The power use-to-performance ratio is unmatched by anything on the market. Apple is breaking us free from decades of stagnation on the hardware front. Nothing else on the market comes close. I expect this to change…
The TDP of the M1 is between 15 and 20 Watts: I use one third of that with Intel... Crunching some numbers, some benchmarks seem to place the M1 as three times faster. Through raw numbers, the M1 seems not much more "performant per watt" than the Pentium Silver - only slightly better. And, for a laptop, the importance is (in general) more on energy efficiency than in speed. Edit: danieldk rightly noted below that TDP…
That's the TDP. For light daily tasks (casual web browsing, e-mail, etc.) the M1 primarily relies on the energy-efficient Icestorm cores. While typing this comment and having some applications in the background (like Slack), package power use hovers between 40 and 300mW (roughly 100mW on average).
The energy efficiency of M1 MacBook is remarkable. My wife had an M1 before I did. She was in some video meetings on battery for some hours, I wouldn't believe her when she told me she still had 80% battery remaining.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thunderbolt is Intel's proprietary technology, I don't think AMD will ever have that. I think you'll have to wait for USB-4 if the current speeds really aren't enough.
The M1 Apple lineup has thunderbolt support, so I don’t see why an AMD laptop couldn’t do the same?