Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple's Blue Ocean

hypercritical.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 262 posts

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#151

Post by bilalq »

ttfkam wrote: post #77

Two things I've been waiting on for years: • MST (DisplayPort daisy chaining) in MacOS. The hardware has supported it for over a decade. The OS is the weak link here. It's the difference between spending $75-$300 for a dock in addition to the cables and just connecting the monitors together along with a single cable to the first monitor. • Non-soldered storage. Seriously. Storage is the most likely component to fail.…

The lack of MST support caught me by surprise. Six years ago, I intentionally bought an expensive monitor with USB-C and daisy-chaining support as the second screen so that the monitor itself would be able to function as my dock. Lo and behold, it worked fine on Windows but not on MacOS. Had to buy a dock separately and now have one more thing cluttering my desk.

I spent so long troubleshooting and trying to figure out why it didn't work before I stumbled on this article[1].

[1]: https://sebvance.medium.com/everything-you-need-to-know-abou...

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#152

Post by graphe »

ironick09 wrote: post #116
1letterunixname wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple devices aren't engineered to last; they're engineered to be manufactured, sell new, and sometimes sell expensive repairs by them. Also, NVIDIA cards in eGPUs and Thunderbolt (arm64) aren't supported. The best solution is either don't use Apple, or have a machine under warranty and very good backups. Complaints aside, the Anker 777 dock does 5K-8K DP over USB-C, 1 GbE, 100w charging, 4 USB-A and more and works w…

All of my apple devices have lasted multiple (4+) years. The only time an apple device hasn’t is because I broke it.

Some of us remember our 2008 MacBook pros GPUs dying and apple refusing to fix it. Their electronics have, however never let me down.

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#153

Post by Savely »

Reason077 wrote: post #65
ChuckMcM wrote: post #24

The short version is: "Wouldn't it be disruptive if Apple went back to replaceable batteries?" but the author stopped short of where that leads. One of the things that doable "now" that wasn't doable "then" is wireless charging. I love that I can put my phone on a pad next to the bed at night and it charges, pick it up and there is no trailing wire to unplug, put it down and there is no wire to find and plug in. This…

> "Why not no battery in the device?" How about a nuclear battery, aka radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG)? This would be sealed in (carefully!) and would last the lifetime of the device, with no need for charging, ever. Would need special steps/handling to ensure safe disposal at end of product life, however.

Imagine Samsung battery incident on another level!

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#154

Post by graphe »

nl wrote: post #144
graphe wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Realistically where would you position these monitors? Ergonomically there aren't many great solutions for any extended use especially once you go up to mutiple large monitors. Tilt your head in those directions and see how long you maintain them comfortably. If you think modern notifications are less distracting I'll respectfully disagree.

> Realistically where would you position these monitors? I have a 34" main monitor positioned directly in front of me, a 24" in vertical orientation I use mostly for multiple terminals and my MPB screen below the 34". I don't think this is an unusual setup. > Tilt your head in those directions This applies to large single monitors too. I think (hope?!) most people have a setup where their main work is right in front…

Are they all in front of you? They sound like they are. Do you find that the positions are comfortable? I cannot see a single article that claims mutiple monitors are ergonomic beyond 2, and most only try to suggest one. https://ergo.human.cornell.edu/ergoguide.html this article might not like the positions you use, but they're just suggestions that I read and found useful.

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#155

Post by thfuran »

luckydata wrote: post #142
stouset wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain why Apple devices in general maintain a higher percentage of their resale value for longer than their competitors’ counterparts?

only laptop I know carved from a single piece of aluminum. not the only reason but for sure that one is a good one. No other laptop feels as solid and I don't understand why nobody else does it.

Milling a case from a block must be far more expensive that folding a few sheets, right?

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#156

Post by tverbeure »

lxgr wrote: post #123
ttfkam wrote: post #77

Two things I've been waiting on for years: • MST (DisplayPort daisy chaining) in MacOS. The hardware has supported it for over a decade. The OS is the weak link here. It's the difference between spending $75-$300 for a dock in addition to the cables and just connecting the monitors together along with a single cable to the first monitor. • Non-soldered storage. Seriously. Storage is the most likely component to fail.…

> Storage is the most likely component to fail. Got any sources for that? I find that hard to believe. > MST (DisplayPort daisy chaining) in MacOS. The hardware has supported it for over a decade. The OS is the weak link here. This is indeed annoying, but with USB4/Thunderbolt support becoming more common in monitors, I believe this is going to be less of an issue going forward.

The only reason I was able to use my 2012 MacBook Pro 15 as my daily driver for 11 years, is because I was able to replace 2 failed non-soldered SSDs.

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#157

Post by onion2k »

graphe wrote: post #135
mdekkers wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Come on, those are not “studies” - they are just the opinions of some random people, and they carry no more or less weight than, for example, my opinion, which is “you can pry my 4 x 27” screens out of my cold, dead, hands.” The NYTimes article is actually explicit about that: > Unlike monitor makers with their multidisplay studies, I have no research proving you’ll find as much benefit from a single monitor as I did…

My point was that Apple probably don't care to cater to these use cases, and see them as niche. I know 0 people who use more than two monitors on any OS.

Every person in my company has a laptop screen and two monitors on their desk, including devs, product, managers, infra, admin... Literally everyone. The only people who don't use them are senior leadership because they're rarely at their desks.

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#159

Post by Moldoteck »

vishnugupta wrote: post #145
lxgr wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Storage is the most likely component to fail. Got any sources for that? I find that hard to believe. > MST (DisplayPort daisy chaining) in MacOS. The hardware has supported it for over a decade. The OS is the weak link here. This is indeed annoying, but with USB4/Thunderbolt support becoming more common in monitors, I believe this is going to be less of an issue going forward.

Data point of one. Last 20 years storage has not failed on me across close to a dozen laptops I’ve owned across various brands. So even I get puzzled whenever I see “storage is the most likely component to fail”. Maybe I just got lucky?

I think it's more about ssd's with limited cycles+ the fact that with smaller RAM, swap can nuke those ssd's pretty fast if you go beyond ram capacity

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#160

Post by thfuran »

eru wrote: post #106
M3L0NM4N wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about a fusion reactor, generating its own hydrogen molecules to power nuclear fusion through electrolysis from the water vapor in the air. There isn't really a theoretical limit to how small a fusion reactor can be, although clearly this would not achievable for a long time.

If you want to go totally crazy, you can use a black hole as a power source. The laws of physics don't give you a minimum size for them either. However for black holes the smaller they are, the more power they emit in terms of hawking radiation.

The power scales to such an extent that a black hole light enough to be in a phone is just an explosion.
Post reply on HN