321–330 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am a very satisfied Apple customer, but will gladly tell you that a Windows machine would make more sense for the use cases you’ve described.
C# is the only odd item there. Entire companies are doing everything else in that list using exclusively MacBook Pros.
This is about the processors, not the laptops, so commenting on the chips instead. They look great, but they look like they're the M1 design, just more of it. Which is plenty for a laptop! But it'll be interesting to see what they'll do for their desktops. Most of the additional chip area went into more GPUs and special-purpose video codec hardware. It's "just" two more cores than the vanilla M1, and some of the effi…
Really curious if the memory bandwidth is entirely available to the CPU if the GPU is idle. An nvidia RTX3090 has nearly 1TB/s bandwidth, so the GPU is clearly going to use as much of the 400GB/s as possible. Other unified architectures have multiple channels or synchronization to memory, such that no one part of the system can access the full bandwidth. But if the CPU can access all 400GB/s, that is an absolute game…
Why no one is talking about the base 14" 8-Core CPU and 14-Core GPU but not a single mention in the presentation ? How the new M1 Pro 8 core compared the the M1 8 core ?
I'd love to see a Pro/Max Mac Mini, but that's not likely to happen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Single handedly? >According to iFixit, the Surface Laptop isn’t repairable at all. In fact, it got a 0 out of 10 for repairability and was labeled a “glue-filled monstrosity.” The lowest scores previously were a 1 out of 10 for all previous iterations of the Surface Pro https://www.extremetech.com/computing/251046-ifixit-labels-s...
One might argue that Surface laptops were Microsoft's answer to MacBooks.
It makes me sad that no one will never be able to build anything with those chips. I imagine there could me many, many innovative products built with these chips if Apple sold them and supported Linux (or even Windows).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The DDR being closer to the core may or may not allow the memory to run at higher speeds due to better signal integrity, but you can purchase DDR4-5333 today whereas the M1 uses 4266. My understanding is that bringing the RAM closer increases the bandwidth (better latency and larger buses), not necessarily the speed of the RAM dies. Also, if I am not mistaken, the RAM in the new M1s is LP-DDR5 (I read that, but it…
The overall bandwidth isn't affected much by the distance alone. Latency, yes, in the sense that the signal literally has to travel further, but that difference is miniscule (like 1/10th of a nanosecond) compared to overall DDR access latencies. Better signal integrity could allow for larger busses, but I don't think this is actually a single 512 bit bus. I think it's multiple channels of smaller busses (32 or 64 bit…
Testing showed that the M1's performance cores had a surprising amount of memory bandwidth.
>One aspect we’ve never really had the opportunity to test is exactly how good Apple’s cores are in terms of memory bandwidth. Inside of the M1, the results are ground-breaking: A single Firestorm achieves memory reads up to around 58GB/s, with memory writes coming in at 33-36GB/s. Most importantly, memory copies land in at 60 to 62GB/s depending if you’re using scalar or vector instructions. The fact that a single Firestorm core can almost saturate the memory controllers is astounding and something we’ve never seen in a design before.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-teste...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just today I got one 6s and one iPhone 7 screen repaired(6s got the glass replaced, the 7 got full assembly replaced) and battery of the 6s replaced at a shop that is not authorized by Apple. It cost me 110$ in total. Previously I got 2017 Macbook Air SSD upgraded using an SSD and an adapter that I ordered from Amazon. What’s that narrative that Apple devices are not upgradable or repairable? It simply not true. If a…
True, but you are talking about devices that are 4-6 years old. Storage is now soldered. Ram has been soldered for a while now, and with Apple Silicon its part of the SoC.
As far as I understand, the less components and heat, the longer the electronics keep working.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A few thousand dollars per year (presumably it will last more than one year) is really not much for the most important piece of equipment a knowledge worker will be using.
It's still a waste if you don't need it though. This money could be spent on much more useful things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple almost single-handedly made computing devices non-repairable or upgradable; across their own product line and the industry in general due to their outsized influence.
Just today I got one 6s and one iPhone 7 screen repaired(6s got the glass replaced, the 7 got full assembly replaced) and battery of the 6s replaced at a shop that is not authorized by Apple. It cost me 110$ in total. Previously I got 2017 Macbook Air SSD upgraded using an SSD and an adapter that I ordered from Amazon. What’s that narrative that Apple devices are not upgradable or repairable? It simply not true. If a…
There's also the fact that Apple does things like integrate the display connector into the panel part. So, if it fails - like when Apple made it too short with the 2016 and 2017 Macbook Pros causing the flexgate controversy - it requires replacing a $600 part instead of a $6 one.
"Apple’s Commitment to the Environment" > Today, Apple is carbon neutral for global corporate operations, and by 2030, plans to have net-zero climate impact across the entire business, which includes manufacturing supply chains and all product life cycles. This also means that every chip Apple creates, from design to manufacturing, will be 100 percent carbon neutral. But what they won't do is put the chip in an expan…
It absolutely doesn't render the carbon-neutrality of the chip useless. Concern about waste and concern about climate change are bound by a political movement and not a whole lot else. It's not wrong to care about waste more, but honestly its emissions that I care about more.
Waste creates more emissions. Instead of producing something once, you produce it twice. That's why waste is bad, it's not just about disposing of the wasted product.