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

MacBook Neo Deep Dive: Benchmarks, Wafer Economics, and the 8GB Gamble

jdhodges.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 433 posts

Re: MacBook Neo Deep Dive: Benchmarks, Wafer Economics, and the 8GB Gamble

#331

Post by SXX »

lifestyleguru wrote: post #307
SXX wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not "soldered". It's literally part of SOC package as it's comes out of TSMC lines. Using exactly the same iPhone chip is kind a the only reason they can target this price target. Hate to defend Apple here, but there are so many more garbage laptops out there for the same price tag that can as well just go directly into landfill. Apple at least have the volume to make sure Mac software actually works on said 8GB…

Yes they will reduce but for a start you have to buy yet another low end laptop. This time will be different.

There is massive percent of population whose needs will be 200% covered with Neo performance. Most people just need a laptop for web browser, watching videos, occasional app use.

Problem with cheap Windows laptops and Chromebooks is not performance, but horrific build quality, displays, webcams, audio and keyboards. This is something Apple have solved. Also there is no Windows which solves a lot of problems.

I was doing gamedev for years on M1 Air with 16GB / 256GB and some other software engineering too FFS. Surely non-power-users can live with less.

Re: MacBook Neo Deep Dive: Benchmarks, Wafer Economics, and the 8GB Gamble

#332

Post by kube-system »

Jaepa wrote: post #322
whynotminot wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This model might trigger planned obsolescence legislation in some jurisdictions. As opposed to years of garbage Windows laptops at the $600 price point, which you seem to expect will remain viable longer than the Neo ... ? If any legislation comes out of this, it will simply be because of Apple's high profile. They were content to let e-rot fill the shelves for years before the Neo.

There could be an arguments that you can install a lighter OS on these machines. That's not as easy with MacOS.

That would be a wild argument to make for a consumer protection regulation. Consumer protections almost exclusively judge a product as-delivered in the way laypeople would use it.

Re: MacBook Neo Deep Dive: Benchmarks, Wafer Economics, and the 8GB Gamble

#333

Post by SXX »

adastra22 wrote: post #293
SXX wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in no way Apple fan, but M5 air with 512GB SSD and 32GB RAM costs $1500. Compared to M1 and 256GB and 16GB at $1200. Adjusted for inflation it pretty much the same.

A refurbished M1 16GB RAM 256GB storage MacBook Air sells for $400 right now. https://www.ebay.com/itm/356717541241

What's your point?

My M1 Air display just failed on me after 5 and half years of daily 10-16 hours of use. Considered how non repairable some parts in MacBooks are I'd rather recommend people buy more expensive new one. E.g you can find very good offers on new M2 M3 etc.

Re: MacBook Neo Deep Dive: Benchmarks, Wafer Economics, and the 8GB Gamble

#334

Post by revengerwizard »

iknowstuff wrote: post #228
revengerwizard wrote: post #227

Was it really necessary to cut out Magsafe? I feel like I end up stumbling on the charging cable at least one or two times. Plus, I wouldn't be able to re-use the old Macbook charger I have :(

Just buy a magnetic usb-c cable if it’s very important to you

The USB-C standard doesn't allow for a magnetic attachment. Besides, those are notoriously unsafe and probably even dangerous to use.

Re: MacBook Neo Deep Dive: Benchmarks, Wafer Economics, and the 8GB Gamble

#335

Post by diffuse_l »

SXX wrote: post #325
diffuse_l wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Had a similar issue - some of the display was garbled for more than a year. Had a replacement screen from aliexpress lying around that cost 126$ two and half years ago, got to do the replacement a few weeks ago, as the kid needed a laptop for school. Turns out the replacement screen resolution was not the same as the original, but it still works fine, took ~1 hour for the replacement. So for me it did make sense to r…

I guess for $126 you mean just display itself? Not complete assembly? If so this is like an option for like super skilled 1% of 1% of us who repair their devices. I obviously checked repair videos and just disassembling top part almost impossible without destroying everything except for aluminum cover. Doing it properly on first try is well beyond my skills. On top of it there is always risk of getting damaged part c…

Complete assembly. Wouldn't call it trivial, but not super hard either. I wouldn't dream of doing this without the complete assembly, not worth the hassle. You run the risk of ruining something, but for me the reasoning was that worst case I'd still have a conputer I can attach to an external monitor. Replacement itself is mostly removing screws and cables carefully - followed the ifixit guide.

Re: MacBook Neo Deep Dive: Benchmarks, Wafer Economics, and the 8GB Gamble

#336

Post by zitterbewegung »

beloch wrote: post #254

>"~1.5-2GB of available application memory (after macOS overhead)." Having an OS eat up >75% of your memory on a fresh boot is not ideal. You're gambling on macOS experiencing zero bloat for the lifetime of this product. If the OS memory footprint grows even just a few percent, users of this model will lose a significant portion of available memory for applications. This model might trigger planned obsolescence legis…

HN is completely out of touch with this laptop. No one cares about any of this analysis they just want a cheap Mac. This has sold so much that the A19 processor is having problems to being sourced .

Also 8gb is good enough for the target market.

Re: MacBook Neo Deep Dive: Benchmarks, Wafer Economics, and the 8GB Gamble

#338

Post by Xmd5a »

zitterbewegung wrote: post #336
beloch wrote: post #254

>"~1.5-2GB of available application memory (after macOS overhead)." Having an OS eat up >75% of your memory on a fresh boot is not ideal. You're gambling on macOS experiencing zero bloat for the lifetime of this product. If the OS memory footprint grows even just a few percent, users of this model will lose a significant portion of available memory for applications. This model might trigger planned obsolescence legis…

HN is completely out of touch with this laptop. No one cares about any of this analysis they just want a cheap Mac. This has sold so much that the A19 processor is having problems to being sourced . Also 8gb is good enough for the target market.

I replaced my 10 years old macbook with a 10 years old macbook. 8 gigs. Good battery. A screen that is not broken. 80 bucks! I really don't see why I should upgrade. Need more compute? Rent a machine on vast.ai. Also I still use my old mac via screen sharing to run servers/databases/etc that tend to eat up RAM.

80 bucks!

Re: MacBook Neo Deep Dive: Benchmarks, Wafer Economics, and the 8GB Gamble

#339

Post by havaloc »

interludead wrote: post #169
havaloc wrote: post #2

I bought a Neo as an out of the house computer and it really is a triumph. If the Air is good enough for 99% of the population, the Neo as is approaches good enough for 90% of the population at half the cost.

As an out-of-the-house computer, or a second/hand-me-down laptop, that tradeoff makes a lot more sense

I use it more and more as a primary, and it doesn't feel like I've made many tradeoffs at all. I even like the keys better, they aren't transparent, so the plastic feels different, but in a good way.

Re: MacBook Neo Deep Dive: Benchmarks, Wafer Economics, and the 8GB Gamble

#340

Post by happyopossum »

Havoc wrote: post #145
happyopossum wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Open Finder. cmd+Q. Does it quit anything? Nope nothing happens. You can’t quit finder - it’s a fundamental part of the hi that always has to run. > Safari Multiple tabs in a window are intended to be treated the same as multiple windows. This has been the case since macOS made tabbed interface components a standard part of the OS. > Open Apps What do you mean? Which apps?

>You can’t quit finder - it’s a fundamental part of the hi that always has to run. That's what google told me after I set out to discover what rules are behind the inconsistency. The solution to inconsistent shortcuts is apparently memorizing which parts of the software that is PREINSTALLED is considered part of the OS and which parts are not. >Which apps? Not apps small a...Apps big A...the thing apple macs ship wit…

> Not apps small a...Apps big A.

That's a fancy spotlight search modal, not an application or window...

> Open apple TV. cmd+w -> minimizes window.

No it doesn't, it closes the window. Look at your dock - minimized windows show up on the other side of the | divider with a mini representation of their contents.

> I feel like I'm being gaslight by all the hn users telling me yeah that makes sense

It feels more like you're willfully railing against the way macOS is because you're not used to it. If you remove your preconceptions about how things should be (and keep in mind that macOS defined most of the things we're talking about 30+ years ago, so it's not like there was a standard to follow), it really does make sense. CMD-W closes the current doc/tab/window, CMD-Q quits the application.

The only time that doesn't work is when the application writer intentionally breaks it (and the macOS community typically rages about that - looking at you chrome!), or you're not dealing with a normal application/app/program (ie you can't close a system prompt with a command targeted at applications).

Post reply on HN