391–400 of 767 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because you are not the ultimate decider of what to do with the machine. If you owned it, you could do anything outside of harm.
The whole concept of the machine is to be bought and optimized for running macOS.
In fact macOS itself is more restrictive nowdays than it used to be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These gains are just through improvements in processors. Now, combine that with parallel leaps for battery tech... It's also good that battery tech hasn't jumped too far ahead already - the constraint has helped in the development in these mobile chips. The display panel is still the biggest energy draw on my laptop. There's a lot of chance for improvement there too. A 2 day battery in 5 years isn't that crazy.
Apple is the kind of company that will choose to slim down the laptop instead of making it 2 day battery life.
You know the gap.
If you charge your phone every night it becomes a habit tied to your daily routine.
If you were to charge your phone every other night, you might lose track of what day you are on, not charge it and then the perceived battery life experience is worse. This is why smart watches with 3-4 days of battery have not prevailed over those with one heavy day of battery. They are annoying to know what day you are on so you might just charge it every night and if you do, the platform is trading off so much power that the experience is worse.
Plus, then you have to carry 2 days worth of battery or have half the power envelope as a laptop with one day. the concept all sounds great but the reality of people using things really has honed in on the fact that these things need to fit into habit and use cases that make sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's one data point: a WebKit compile took 25min on the Air vs 20min on the Mini/Pro. That 25min is still a bit faster than the Intel 16-inch Pro, which took 27min and waaay faster than Intel 13-inch Pro at 46min. The crazy thing is that both M1 MacBooks still had 91% battery left after the compile, vs 61% on the 16-inch Pro and 24% on the 13-inch Intel Pro. [1] https://techcrunch.com/2020/11/17/yeah-apples-m1-macb…
Is this a 1-1 comparison? If the ARM compile is compiling to ARM binaries then there might be less work/optimizations since it is a newer architecture. Seems like a test with two variables that changed. Would be interesting to see them both cross-compile to their respective opposite archs.
It's worth noting that cross-compiling is definitely harder in many ways, because you can't always evaluate constant expressions easily at compile-time in the same way your runtime code will, etc, too, and have to jump through hoops.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because you are not the ultimate decider of what to do with the machine. If you owned it, you could do anything outside of harm.
The whole concept of the machine is to be bought and optimized for running macOS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is insane perf/watt. x86 backwards compatibility may have gotten us to where we are, but it's certainly holding it back. Arm is looking great, and maybe it's time for x86 to die.
And that backwards compatibility may not even be necessary, given Rosetta's performance. Sure Apple is using lots of tricks, but if Microsoft or any Linux project could get even somewhat close...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's time for Intel and x86 to die. But I would also be a little wary, because ARM systems are way more locked down than x86 systems today.
Why does Intel need to die? Sure they're not exactly the company they used to be, but would it be enough for them to just move away from x86? I'm just thinking I don't want just one or two or three companies doing procs.
Intel dying would free up resources for development by other companies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't make a huge amount of sense to buy a Mac if you're not going to use Mac OS as your daily driver. A lot of the benefits (e.g. battery life, touchpad quality) are dependent on software as well as hardware, and are greatly diminished on Windows or Linux.
I've never been that impressed with the Mac Mini's battery life or touchpad :-)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I switched from a MBP to a Mac Mini and iPad Pro last winter for my personal setup. I absolutely love it. I spend roughly equal time on both, but I’m not doing a ton of programming these days outside of work. Taking the iPad traveling is way easier than taking a laptop.
Are you using the Magic Keyboard? Just asking if that is a big part of your good experience with the iPad.
Can AMD/Intel pivot to ARM and provide the efficiency benefits to the non-Apole ecosystem? Can Apple's M1X/M2 outperform desktop CPUs? Qualcomm tried their hand at desktop CPUs with Microsoft a few years back. Is it time they tried again? How comparable is a Surface Go with the performance/efficiency of M1?
Surface Go is nowhere close, half as fast in single core, 1/5th as fast in multicore. The 5W TDP is really a generic number with no real meaning as Intel doesn't really abide by it, I would say it probably uses about the same power as the M1, possibly much more under turbo while also having a much higher power floor (IE: When at idle the Surface go uses much more power)
Keep in mind that the Surface Go is very low-cost and the CPU is at a 14nm build.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is really the 12th generation of Apple's own chips, though - and the third of this particular design, if I recall correctly.
Are you claiming that A1 is in the same category as M1? If so... then Intel's latest chip generations should be traced back to 8088 in 1979.
And architectural similarities between their first 14nm chip and their last 10nm chips are as m1 is similar to a12z at least, may be even their first 64bit