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

M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

eclecticlight.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 419 posts

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#331

Post by Someone »

iAMkenough wrote: post #227
Someone wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder why they haven’t fixed it yet by removing bash and the other GPL-licensed tools. Even if they currently need one to boot the system, they have the resources to change that.

I refuse to drop Samba and go back to AFP

Are you sure you’re using Samba? AFAIK, Apple removed that years ago (I think because it’s GPLv3 licensed)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Message_Block#Netsmb:

“NSMB (Netsmb and SMBFS) is a family of in-kernel SMB client implementations in BSD operating systems. It was first contributed to FreeBSD 4.4 by Boris Popov, and is now found in a wide range of other BSD systems including NetBSD and macOS“

https://appleinsider.com/articles/11/03/23/inside_mac_os_x_1...:

“The upcoming release of Mac OS X 10.7 Lion Server will remove the formerly bundled open source Samba software and replace it with Apple's own tools for Windows file sharing and network directory services”

I also think they complete removed AFP support.

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#332

Post by mmcnl »

josu wrote: post #278
alberth wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only 1-monitor support seems like a market segmentation decision, not a lack of capability. (Much like how the iPhone Pro has faster USB-C data transfer speeds vs base iPhone)

Yeah, you can actually use these dongles to connect more monitors. https://m1displays.com/

A DisplayLink is not a real dock. It's basically compressing the display output using the CPU and decompressing it using an external GPU in a box to output it to more displays. The performance is terrible, you get weird artifacts, there's lag, you can't use it for gaming, etc.

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#333

Post by [deleted] »

BigJ1211 wrote: post #234
wubrr wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strong disagree. UI is very buggy and inconsistent. CLI tools/shell is attempting to follow more-or-less standardish unix/linux setup but fails pretty hard, with many of the same commands existing but behaving just differently enough to be annoying. Uses it's own set of shortcuts, different from what's standard on windows/linux and most other operating systems. Not sure what people mean when they say completely vague…

As someone who uses Windows, Arch with Hyperland and MacOS almost daily. I am immensely curious about what you find inconsistent and buggy about macOS? In my experience that’s been the least buggy and inconsistent of the three. My Mac and Linux shortcuts align more than my Windows and Linux/Mac ones. For the most used ones it’s CMD + whatever the standard key is for that shortcut, instead of Control. Overal I prefer…

[deleted]

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#334

Post by mmcnl »

Ographer wrote: post #276
heyoni wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that because the screen generation is software based? I noticed that when using display link and couldn’t bare the input lag or worse the compression from moving a window too rapidly. Switched to a monitor with thunderbolt output and my coworkers thought I was being a diva.

My understand is that yes, the external displays are both rendered by the CPU and so there are lower frame rates and frames dropped which is a concern of mine since I am pushing this computer to its limits with some applications I run. I've heard that for casual use it isn't too noticeable. Unfortunately I don't think the M1 Air supports TB daisy chaining unless you're ok with mirrored displays. I still can't decide…

macOS doesn't support daisy chaining, and never has. You can't use daisy chaining with any Mac. It's weird, it's stupid, but it's true. That's the sole reason the dock market is so complicated.

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#335

Post by BigJ1211 »

wubrr wrote: post #326
BigJ1211 wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who uses Windows, Arch with Hyperland and MacOS almost daily. I am immensely curious about what you find inconsistent and buggy about macOS? In my experience that’s been the least buggy and inconsistent of the three. My Mac and Linux shortcuts align more than my Windows and Linux/Mac ones. For the most used ones it’s CMD + whatever the standard key is for that shortcut, instead of Control. Overal I prefer…

> I am immensely curious about what you find inconsistent and buggy about macOS? I posted a list of recent issues I've run into elsewhere in the thread, but there are many bugs and inconsistencies in macos: - Doc breaking/becoming inaccessible. - Running app windows disappearing/becoming inaccessible. - Cursor/caret disappearing when editing text. - Can't move windows between workspaces. - Constant issues with extern…

> I posted a list of recent issues I've run into elsewhere in the thread, but there are many bugs and inconsistencies in macos: > > - Doc breaking/becoming inaccessible. > > - Running app windows disappearing/becoming inaccessible. > > - Cursor/caret disappearing when editing text. > > - Can't move windows between workspaces. > > - Constant issues with external monitors. > > - Switching between windows via command-tab regularly breaks. > > These are all well-known issues that have existed for years. If you google them you will find threads and workaround from 5+ years ago.

I am not pretending MacOS is bug free, again I was just asking for your issues with the OS. But from what I've seen in your replies it seems you post-hoc justified your opinion by googling for known issues.

Unless you're claiming you have all of these issues, constantly and consistently?

Even a Mac does well with the occasional reboot, I have never had a system that was completely issue free. Be it Windows, Mac or Linux.

>> My Mac and Linux shortcuts align more than my Windows and Linux/Mac ones

>Because.. you changed your linux shortcuts to match macos? The most obvious example is that ctrl+c/s/v etc are instead command+c/s/v on macos.

I literally said in my post that the most common ones have CMD instead of CTRL, this is more than "a bit disingenuous".

The reason I prefer the Super + key, is so it doesn't mess with using CTRL+key in the terminal. As that behaviour is running contrary to expectations set by every other OS. CTRL+C doesn't mean copy in the terminal, it means terminate the currently running program. CTRL+A doesn't mean "select all" it means, jump to the start of the line.

Programs shouldn't be overwriting OS level shortcuts, though I completely understand how it came to be. It is really counter-intuitive for new users. Super + key makes more sense for OS level shortcuts, as it's literally the Windows symbol on most keyboards.

>> I hope you realise that saying “very buggy and inconsistent” without naming anything specific isn’t any less vague and ambiguous than “usability and comfort”.

>There are literally dozens of examples of issues listed in this thread. I hope you realize that saying 'give me examples' when there are many many examples all around the post your replying too is a bit disingenuous. I can't keep repeat ing what I've already posted in the thread in every single comment.

I don't know how you read, but I read from comment to comment, top to bottom. I'm in the top thread where you made the claims without any examples, I don't know why you expect me to look elsewhere for the examples that you might have posted or not. Nor why you think I would look for other people's issues.

If you think that's disingenuous that's your prerogative, I think that's how most people read these thread's including you. You don't need to keep repeating the same thing, you can literally just link your comment with the specifics.

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#336

Post by mmcnl »

sneak wrote: post #71
asylteltine wrote: post #67

And yet the air can’t support more than one monitor. I know Apple is a small company with only a few engineers so it must have been too hard. Sarcasm obviously. As an Apple enthusiast it’s so annoying how they sniff farts.

The Air is not the computer for people who use a lot of external monitors. 99.9%+ of MBAir users will never connect even one external monitor. They make a small MacBook Pro that is suited for that task.

It's not a computer for people who don't use external monitors because it's not supported. Connecting more than 1 display is not a "pro" task, it's pretty normal especially for professional purposes.

Also, the base MBP 14" doesn't support more than 1 display either.

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#337

Post by mmcnl »

willseth wrote: post #235
masklinn wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering the M3 has 55% more transistors than the M1, I'm sure they could have found some room for a third display controller, or a more capable one (one with MST support for instance), or just a more flexible one. They're selling a $1600 machine which can't drive two external displays, it's sad. Intel's HD Graphics have been doing better since 2012 and they're trash.

It’s a business decision. You don’t think Apple knows the demand for multiple external displays? If they thought it would sell more Macs, they would do it.

Ofcourse it's a business decision but it's one a lot of people disagree with. How can you keep repeating 99.9% of the customers don't care when it's one of the most repeated complaints on places like this over and over again? It's a stupid decision that doesn't make sense.

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#338

Post by saagarjha »

wubrr wrote: post #302
karolist wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I call BS on the FAANG statement. I work at FAANG and 80% SWEs use MBPs, actually if we go by literal meaning of FAANG company list, they do not even focus on desktop software and are mostly web companies and the tooling is all backend where SWE machines do not do any heavy lifting.

You work at FAANG and you can run your entire stack on MacOS? Which FAANG? Or you mean, you work at FAANG and you can run your web application which is 0.01% of the stack on your mac? > they do not even focus on desktop software and are mostly web companies and the tooling is all backend where SWE machines do not do any heavy lifting. The web frontend/ui is a relatively small portion of the development that goes on a…

The complex backend code isn’t going to work on your little laptop either. This is a stupid position to take, because people care more about whether they can spin up a development environment, not run all the code that goes to production.

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#339

Post by acdha »

flashback2199 wrote: post #233
aseo wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always understood the move to Apple Silicon was also for supply chain concerns, and not just technical. I remember reading that Apple would often express frustration at having to align their products' schedules based on Intel's schedules, and there would be a lack of support from Intel in their collaboration -- I could see this is a a valid bottleneck for Apple, and this isn't their first rodeo in processor transit…

So why work only with Intel and not also with AMD. Never understood that. They chose vendor lock in so of course the vendor is going to sit on it same as Motorola did and later IBM. Now they still have vendor lock in except the vendor is internal. From a distance, it looks super dumb, betting that you can do better with an internal project than playing off the established duopoly. I'm sure I'm too out of the know to…

One thing to remember is that hardware designs have a much longer lead time than software and significant support commitments since they need to maintain a business relationship for a decade. When AMD started gaining on speed versus Intel, especially for the thermally-constrained systems Apple sells, Apple already had an in-house CPU design team which was doing good work and they were quite familiar with the benefits in terms of roadmap coordination, pricing, and support.
Post reply on HN