371–380 of 473 posts
Genuine question: who would buy a MacBook Neo to run Windows on it…? Surely people buying Neo are trying to escape MicroSlop?!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes it does. LPCAMM path is still dozens of millimeters. Soldered on is one mm or less.
Yep. Even the framework seems to be moving to soldered on ram.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Outside of some specialized benchmarks only Geekbench 6 is more or less usable for comparisons between generations or manufacturers.
out of curiosity, what makes Geekbench 6 better?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the EU it costs $200 more so it's more like a low to mid range laptop. I have a feeling these are aimed at the same sector as the Framework 12, school provided laptops for kids meant to be bought in bulk by institutions. But there they're competing against $150 Chromebooks and neither is even close.
In the EU, you don't need to buy an extended warranty, since existing consumer protection laws require the sort of extended repair coverage Americans have to pay extra for. Taxes are also included in the EU price, but not the US price.
I sometimes run Xubuntu on my phone via termux and proot. The hardware we carry around in our pockets is ridiculously capable.
There's a big difference between running native ARM software on ARM and emulating x86 to run Windows. If this Mac was x86, it could have probably run Windows much faster thanks to virtualization
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And oh yes, the modern Mac shares those 8GB with the video RAM... The Unified Memory Architecture is why these Macs are so fast—no wasted cycles moving data between RAM and GPU. And the data is compressed in real-time so less data has to be transferred and there's less ware and tear on the SSD, which is directly to SoC [1]. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47354705
Well yes it's still only 8GB shared between macos, the VM and the graphics buffers. On a mobile chip.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My 13 year old mac desktop is sitting here with 14.82gb used with nothing but messages and firefox. Really dount that 8gb will cut it.
This is really not the right comparison to make. An OS will use memory liberally. Give it more and it'll use more. Give it less and it'll swap to disk. So the real question is how long a given workload takes to complete, or whether you can multi-task without shitting out to/from disk every time you switch windows. "My OS uses X amount of RAM" is an entirely meaningless and irrelevant statement.
The memory eaters most people are complaining about are not workloads, but shitty communication apps that keep all those cat pictures from the last 4 months uncompressed in ram...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because I was fed up with parallels subscription model and they make me pay for the upgrade the non-subscription version with every new macOS release, I dropped parallels for UTM. I barely need windows, only every other month or so and often just for some small tasks. UTM is nice, but performance running windows is waaay below parallels. It is free, however, so I won't complain.
The performance story doesn't really make sense as both UTM and Parallels use Apple Hypervisor Kit which pretty much is the hypervisor running Windows. It should be identical.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Especially if that is my only use case.
Strange. I'm still using a i5 powered 8gb ram Pixelbook for day to day browsing. Honestly works great. But I'm also not one of those people who feel the need to keep 300 tabs open all the time.