251–260 of 942 posts
Make it as fabulous as much as you want, $1700 for an 8 core, 8 gigs of ram machine is just one plain fabulous joke. This in the time when 16 gigs ram is the baseline if you plan to do anything more than facebook and instagram.
Don't forget the entry-level 256GB SSD. With 1TB drives around 90€ at retail.
iPhone still have 64GB as their base storage in 2021...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am trying to figure out where I said anything on the contrary.
You mentioned "they come with blazingly fast SSDs" as part of what is "allowing devices to get away with less available memory"
I am not defending apple in any way whatsoever, I even mentioned in the first sentence of the comment. I stated that they are able to do that because they compensate with compression and SSDs, applications in the background can be thrown in the swap and the user will rarely notice.
One thing which I don't think has been commented on is the marketing effort behind the M1. It's getting a lot of prominence and its use across lots of computers means that there can be a consistent message that "M1 is great - get a new Mac and get an M1". It also provides an opportunity to distinguish between M1 and the next generation M2 (presumably). I've always thought Intel's marketing was a bit confused - i7 sta…
It could be clearer but I suspect they do it on purpose for a purpose I've never understood. I've always thought that a system like i7-4-8-10-M (4 cores, 8 threads, 10th gen - Mobile) i5-8-8-11-H (8 cores, 8 threads, 11th gen - High perf/Desktop) There has to be a reason they haven't just been explicit with it. When I shop for a cpu I care about a handful of things, manufacturer, cores, threads, generation, model
The 4004 was a hit and the rest is history!
Make it as fabulous as much as you want, $1700 for an 8 core, 8 gigs of ram machine is just one plain fabulous joke. This in the time when 16 gigs ram is the baseline if you plan to do anything more than facebook and instagram.
So my sister does professional photography, and went from a 16GB MacBook Pro(2016) to an 8GB Air, and reports no decrease of productivity - quite the opposite, in her experience all Adobe programs run much faster, and the machine is quieter and lighter to boot. So yeah, I'm not sure - maybe the ram amount isn't as a big deal as people make it out to be. On the other hand I'm a C++ programer and my workstation has 128…
Apple collects a lot of metrics and I’m sure they know this well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't disagree that 8GiB for $1700 machine is absurd, however, I feel compelled to point out that MacOS is significantly more aggressive with memory compression than other operating systems and they come with blazingly fast SSDs, allowing devices to get away with less available memory.
> and they come with blazingly fast SSDs... Actually, they're somewhat slow compared to the competition. A 500GB M1 SSD gives you about 3.1GB/s of write and 2.75GB/s of read performance [1]. In comparison - a $219 Samsung 980 Pro benchmarks at 4.2GB/s of write and 5.2GB/s of read performance [2]. Both on Disk Test from Black Magic. [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/mac/comments/k2lhi8/ssd_speedtest_o... [2]: https://www.…
I was thinking that there’ll be “M2” by now but a suspicion is growing inside me that they might use a NUMA cluster configuration with PCIe interconnect for upper tier models. Doesn’t it make sense?
One thing which I don't think has been commented on is the marketing effort behind the M1. It's getting a lot of prominence and its use across lots of computers means that there can be a consistent message that "M1 is great - get a new Mac and get an M1". It also provides an opportunity to distinguish between M1 and the next generation M2 (presumably). I've always thought Intel's marketing was a bit confused - i7 sta…
It could be clearer but I suspect they do it on purpose for a purpose I've never understood. I've always thought that a system like i7-4-8-10-M (4 cores, 8 threads, 10th gen - Mobile) i5-8-8-11-H (8 cores, 8 threads, 11th gen - High perf/Desktop) There has to be a reason they haven't just been explicit with it. When I shop for a cpu I care about a handful of things, manufacturer, cores, threads, generation, model
I usually end up putting it into cpubenchmark to get any sort of comparable numbers.
Nowadays a chip from 2014 and 2019 can both be named i5, and the 2014 can have higher clockspeed while being half as slow... You just can't tell, and maybe that's the goal.
Assuming the M1 performance extrapolates to desktop power/cooling it's going to be a monster chip. If that is the case I think apple will not stop at having the fastest watch/phone/tablet/laptop/PC. Why not go after the datacenter and leave money (a ton of money) on the table?
One of the big reasons the M1 is so fast is its RAM is on-die. Latency and throughput to memory are dramatically better and you don't have to drive those long traces, saving power as well. Servers need to scale to memory sizes in the terabyte range. Apple will need a new design that uses conventional memory before they can go after the big workstation market, let alone server.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So my sister does professional photography, and went from a 16GB MacBook Pro(2016) to an 8GB Air, and reports no decrease of productivity - quite the opposite, in her experience all Adobe programs run much faster, and the machine is quieter and lighter to boot. So yeah, I'm not sure - maybe the ram amount isn't as a big deal as people make it out to be. On the other hand I'm a C++ programer and my workstation has 128…
That machine is using swap file a lot, in couple of years SSD will die.
One thing which I don't think has been commented on is the marketing effort behind the M1. It's getting a lot of prominence and its use across lots of computers means that there can be a consistent message that "M1 is great - get a new Mac and get an M1". It also provides an opportunity to distinguish between M1 and the next generation M2 (presumably). I've always thought Intel's marketing was a bit confused - i7 sta…
It could be clearer but I suspect they do it on purpose for a purpose I've never understood. I've always thought that a system like i7-4-8-10-M (4 cores, 8 threads, 10th gen - Mobile) i5-8-8-11-H (8 cores, 8 threads, 11th gen - High perf/Desktop) There has to be a reason they haven't just been explicit with it. When I shop for a cpu I care about a handful of things, manufacturer, cores, threads, generation, model
And it's not that like Intel is really competing with anybody.