321–330 of 333 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you able to push 120hz on both external monitors? I’m guessing not. Looked at 2 startech DP dongles and all permutations seem to tap out at 60hz. Really hoping I’m wrong, would love a 120hz solution if possible.
No, 60Hz max with the startech.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mentioned input lag - how noticeable is this effect and is it something you can "hide" by increasing the tracking speed or other settings? While it might be down to the mediocre Logitech gear he's using, one complaint I have gotten on occasion is how the cursor does not always keep up with his mouse inputs.
The effect to me is noticeable. If I gave it to my SO or some average user I dont' think it would be noticeable. But at the same time, we're all here, so we're not average users. However, on that monitor I have terminal or documentation so for me it works quite fine. Increasing the tracking speed or mouse refresh rates won't help in this case. I will say though that the system is rock solid for me. I've read complain…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get what you are saying, but most people don’t question if a computer can support 2 external monitors in 2021/2022, so it’s very unlikely they would glance at that in the specs. Hell my 2016 MBPro can push at least 4 external monitors. Maybe more I honestly don’t know, it’s not like I ever needed that information. It’s like a more extreme version of buying a phone and finding out it doesn’t come with a charger. Sur…
> but most people don’t question if a computer can support 2 external monitors in But we are talking about the iMac here i.e. it already is an external monitor. Is there much of a market for 3 displays ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the guy was just trolling. Esp that TLB stuff thats quite speculative and if true means memory hopping, write heavy, gpu bound apps can't squeeze all of the fastest, niche version of m1 ultra. I mean, thats just ridiculous. Its obvious to any programmer that squeezing all from a processor requires optimizations, usually for rapidly diminishing returns. My m1 max laptop is so good that if it broke today, I'd l…
If you've hung around some of the previous M1 threads, I really don't think he is trolling. That's actually how some people feel about it. I gotta say it's been really wild watching "epistemic closure" in action. There are clearly two different sets of facts and two different realities based on them that have emerged at this point, one where M1 is slower than x86 and requires everything to be emulated and USB doesn't…
I'm saying they're incomplete in terms of hardware/firmware.
It's a critism of the hardware not implementing full protocols so that devices work and so that you can change and upgrade your computer. Some people don't want or need to do that, just like I'm not very good with automobile maintainance and don't care about parts availability for my car or that it has all electrical ground points in the engine compartment inaccessible behind plastic. Someone else can deal with that. And that's what Apple computers are. Bad computers that are someone elses problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can you call a 2000$ mb pro or a 1700 imac low end devices?
Mac Mini is under $1000 and it’s the same chip.
The 14- and 16-inch Pros support 3+ displays and the built in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A legal mandate that they had to be different colours where be the best way I think.
Works well for USB3.0 vs. 2.0/1.0 that’s for sure. Legally mandated I’m not sure, but yeah, colors for sure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I think the USB naming is the result of not using marketers. No, it's specifically to give marketers what they want, which is the ability to advertise support for the latest version of the spec without actually having to improve the product. It's not USB-IF's marketers that want this, it's the vendors who pay USB-IF whose marketers want this.
Because being able to differentiate uniquely different offerings by different designations is only of value to marketers? There are differences that warranted the incrementing of the numbering - mainly the vastly superior USB-C connector over the gawd awful USB-A, Micro, Mini and that other one that I can never remember the name of.
What are you talking about? The whole point we're discussing here is that thanks to marketers we have the opposite of that where the exact same product has had three different marketing versions associated with it over the last few years without any actual difference.
USB naming/numbering was perfectly reasonable up to 3.0. Higher speed revisions got a new number and lower speed revisions kept their old one.
Then with 3.1 this all changed. Suddenly the same port that was a USB 3.0 port yesterday is now a USB 3.1 Gen1 port and the new 10 gigabit speed is USB 3.1 Gen2.
Then 3.2 comes along and suddenly those ports are now 3.2 Gen1 and 3.2 Gen2, with the new additions of 3.2 Gen1x2 and 3.2 Gen2x2 modes.
What would have been wrong with continuing the same way they had already been doing things and just calling the SuperSpeed+ mode "USB 3.1" while leaving the old ports referred to as USB 3.0, then when dual lane came around that is "USB 3.2"? It's straightforward, easy to understand, and doesn't have any chance of confusing someone in to thinking "well this thing has USB 3.1 Gen1 while this other one only has USB 3.0, I guess the first one's better".
> There are differences that warranted the incrementing of the numbering - mainly the vastly superior USB-C connector over the gawd awful USB-A, Micro, Mini and that other one that I can never remember the name of.
The type C connector is independent of the versioned standards. The USB 3.1 spec was released in July 2013 while the Type C connector spec didn't come out until August 2014. USB 3.1's 10gbit SuperSpeed+ mode is allowed and supported on the same USB 3.x Type A and Micro-B connectors as USB 3.0 SuperSpeed uses. USB 3.2's dual link mode of course requires a Type C connector at both ends.
USB 4 actually requires a Type C connector, while it supports single lane operation for setup and fallback it requires all devices support dual lane. The 10 gigabit mode also uses different encoding than SuperSpeed+ so it's not just another rename.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can you call a 2000$ mb pro or a 1700 imac low end devices?
What are you talking about ? Both the 13" MBPro as well as the iMac start at $1299. The $2k MBPro with M1 Pro can drive 2 external 6k monitors, which seems reasonable. If you're the kind of user who needs 4 external displays, you're probably going to want the M1 Max anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are you talking about ? Both the 13" MBPro as well as the iMac start at $1299. The $2k MBPro with M1 Pro can drive 2 external 6k monitors, which seems reasonable. If you're the kind of user who needs 4 external displays, you're probably going to want the M1 Max anyway.
Sorry i used conversion from prices in euros, the base m1 imac is around 1630$ converted here. That's not by any mean cheap or entry level pricing and no it's not ok even for the 2k MBpro to only support 2 monitors at maximum. The kind of user who needs 3 displays doesn't need an m1 max anyway. I'm that user.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It didn’t become widely known until after the M1s had shipped - I was caught unexpected after someone at work couldn’t connect two to theirs.
> Simultaneously supports full native resolution on the built-in display at millions of colors and: One external display with up to 6K resolution at 60Hz Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20201110215047/https://www.apple... Literally stated on the tech specs day of launch. Yes, Apple historically under promises[0] and over delivers, but in this case they stated exactly what it supported. [0] Apple has never claimed…