31–40 of 473 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah. It's the first production Mac using an A-chip and is a Mac that has had many things cut out for savings. The question is did Apple feature cut required functionality.
The first Apple Silicon developer boxes were Mac Minis with A series chips so I wouldn’t have expected any issues.
Funnily it probably runs Windows better than the typical corporate spyware burdened x86 laptop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was quite a bit of discussion about that when the M1 first came out, but none of it really seemed to have happened six years later. The target audience isn't in danger of wearing it out and the ones that will push the limits will grow tired of it and sell it in a year or two or move on to the Neo 2, which might have 12gb of ram due to the expected chip. I still think it's a great machine, but I think all these…
>There was quite a bit of discussion about that when the M1 first came out, but none of it really seemed to have happened six years later. 1. How do you know nothing happened? Define nothing in this case. Do Mac users check and report their SSD wear anywhere? 2. Didn't the OG 256gb M1 have 2 128MB NAND chips instead of one 256 meaning better wear resistance?
Funnily it probably runs Windows better than the typical corporate spyware burdened x86 laptop.
https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/17011372
This was the latest UTM in the App Store, so native Hypervisor.Framework access for arm64 Windows acceleration.
Was that in doubt?
This is them confirming that the CPU has enough virtualization support that they can virtualize rather than emulate the guest OS
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn’t basically m1 air equivalent in specs? I’ve got that one and I’m yet to feel limited.
Always excited to hear about fellow M1 users. I’m not limited in the slightest. 5-6 years strong now?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah. It's the first production Mac using an A-chip and is a Mac that has had many things cut out for savings. The question is did Apple feature cut required functionality.
The first Apple Silicon developer boxes were Mac Minis with A series chips so I wouldn’t have expected any issues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>There was quite a bit of discussion about that when the M1 first came out, but none of it really seemed to have happened six years later. 1. How do you know nothing happened? Define nothing in this case. Do Mac users check and report their SSD wear anywhere? 2. Didn't the OG 256gb M1 have 2 128MB NAND chips instead of one 256 meaning better wear resistance?
If swapping was causing SSDs to fail on M1 Macs, we would never see the end of the hysterical articles about "NANDgate". Since we haven't seen any in all these years, it's seems pretty certain it's not happening.
NAND is still the same wearable part that regular X64 laptops have, Apple doesn't use some magic industrial grade parts but same dies that Samsung, Micron and SK ship to X64 OEMS, and those are replaceable for a reason, because they eventually fail.
Can it run Linux?
In a VM, definitely. Just like other Macs.