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

Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#491

Post by threeseed »

lhl wrote: post #133

Apple launched M2 MBPs only in January. I wonder if Qualcomm's Snapdragon X Elite (benchmarking now, but not in products until mid-2024) drove some of the timing on this launch: https://www.windowscentral.com/hardware/laptops/qualcomm-bri...

ARM on Windows is going to be irrelevant for at least a decade likely forever.

There is a long-standing culture with the Mac that (a) backwards compatibility is minimal, (b) developers need to always keep their code current and (c) users should expect constant turnover in the platform. None of that exists on Windows. And when we last saw Windows on ARM the outcomes were that this wasn't going to change.

Which means it will never be a transition rather a fragmentation of Windows ecosystem into two equal parts. Making it far less compelling for everyone.

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#492

Post by walterbell »

spiralpolitik wrote: post #334
lathiat wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really, really wish they would fix this silly display scan-out limitation. I gave them a (frustrating) pass on the M1 given it was the first evolution from iPhone/iPad where it wouldn't have mattered. But seems silly to have made it all the way to the M3. Wanting to dock onto two displays even at the low end doesn't seem like such a niche use-case. I'm sure there is some kind of technical explanation but both Intel…

The technical explanation is that on the base M1/M2 SoC there is one Thunderbolt bus that supports 2 display outputs. On the MacBook Air one output is connected to the internal display leaving one output for an external display. (The Mac Mini that uses the same SoC is limited to 2 external displays for the same reason) To support more displays they would have to add support for a second Thunderbolt bus to the base So…

Allow the user to turn off the internal display in favor of 2 external displays. That would be a usable docked configuration.

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#493

Post by walterbell »

stouset wrote: post #464
justinclift wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At a ~recent work place the entire floor of developers had (Intel) MacBook Pros with dual 24" monitors. Some of them were trying out Apple Silicon replacements, though I'm not aware of what they did monitor wise. Probably used the excuse to buy a single large ultrawide each instead, though I don't actually know. ;)

Which workplaces are these that buy low-end laptops for their employees but shell out for dual monitor workstations?

External displays can be used for multiple generations of laptop hardware. Unlike CPUs, displays are not improving dramatically each year.

MacBook Air is a world-leading form factor for travel, it's not "low-end".

MBA with extra storage/RAM can exceed revenue of base MBP.

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#494

Post by threeseed »

latchkey wrote: post #326
rewmie wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any reason for not upgrading? Why is this sort of question always framed as if people have to provide a justification for not buying a new model, as if spending money on the new shiny without any reason is normal or desirable? We live in a day and age where hardware bought a decade ago still packs enough punch to run most of today's software without any hiccup. Why would anyone waste their cash to replace something…

It is an honest question. For some background in my thinking, it is because today's announcement really focused on Intel users. My semi-educated guess is that Apple did a whole bunch of user studies and realized there are a lot of people out there, like the OP, who haven't upgraded yet, hence the focus. As a result, I'm genuinely curious why this person hasn't upgraded. And for my own personal experience, the upgrade…

> My semi-educated guess is that Apple did a whole bunch of user studies and realized there are a lot of people out there

Apple has telemetry from macOS. So they knew exactly what percentage of users are still on Intel Macs.

And it's low-hanging fruit to go after them then try and convince existing Windows users.

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#495

Post by huytersd »

internet2000 wrote: post #158
koito17 wrote: post #102

One thing that left me a bit confused was the comparison against Intel Macs. Although I am still using an Intel 16-inch MacBook, I really wanted to see how the M3 fared against the M2, not Intel and M1. I think it's no surprise the M3 exceeds the Intel Core i7-9750H in basically all of Apple's own benchmarking. My real question, which will probably be answered next week, is how it compares to the generation right bef…

I imagine the amount of people upgrading from an M2 Mac will be close to 0, while there's a lot of Intel stragglers out there.

I’m an Intel strangler because it’s the only way I can have Mac and Windows on the same machine. Am I the only person that really needs this? Parallels has trash performance.

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#496

Post by richardg_ »

spiralpolitik wrote: post #334
lathiat wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really, really wish they would fix this silly display scan-out limitation. I gave them a (frustrating) pass on the M1 given it was the first evolution from iPhone/iPad where it wouldn't have mattered. But seems silly to have made it all the way to the M3. Wanting to dock onto two displays even at the low end doesn't seem like such a niche use-case. I'm sure there is some kind of technical explanation but both Intel…

The technical explanation is that on the base M1/M2 SoC there is one Thunderbolt bus that supports 2 display outputs. On the MacBook Air one output is connected to the internal display leaving one output for an external display. (The Mac Mini that uses the same SoC is limited to 2 external displays for the same reason) To support more displays they would have to add support for a second Thunderbolt bus to the base So…

Is this an actual hardware issue though? One issue is MacOS has never supported DisplayPort MST (Multi-Stream Transport) EVER as far as I can tell. MST allows for multiple display streams to be natively sent over a single connection for docks or daisy chaining monitors. Back on Intel Mac's if you had a dock with 2 displays or daisy chained 2 together you would get mirrored displays. The exact same Mac/displays in boot camp MST would work perfectly. 1x display per Thunderbolt 4 port is the worst!

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#497

Post by [deleted] »

photonerd wrote: post #204
polishTar wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In addition to the reduced memory bandwidth, the M3 pro also loses 2 performance cores for only 2 more efficiency cores. M2 pro: 8 performance cores + 4 efficiency cores. M3 pro: 6 performance cores + 6 efficiency cores. Not a great trade... I'm not sure the M3 pro can be considered an upgrade

Depends. Is it faster? Then it's an upgrade. Has the CPU industry really managed to pull off it's attempt at a bs coup that more cores always === better? I thought we'd learned our lesson with the silly Mhz Myth already?

[deleted]

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#499

Post by baggy_trough »

huytersd wrote: post #495
internet2000 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine the amount of people upgrading from an M2 Mac will be close to 0, while there's a lot of Intel stragglers out there.

I’m an Intel strangler because it’s the only way I can have Mac and Windows on the same machine. Am I the only person that really needs this? Parallels has trash performance.

You can run ARM Windows under Parallels, which is good enough for me.

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#500

Post by threeseed »

HumblyTossed wrote: post #372
rewmie wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any reason for not upgrading? Why is this sort of question always framed as if people have to provide a justification for not buying a new model, as if spending money on the new shiny without any reason is normal or desirable? We live in a day and age where hardware bought a decade ago still packs enough punch to run most of today's software without any hiccup. Why would anyone waste their cash to replace something…

Because capitalism, that’s why. Capitalists have convinced people it is a moral imperative to continue to spend constantly.

I am sure that 16yo girl buying an iPhone is thoughtfully postulating about the juxtaposition of morality and capitalism.

And not because it's shiny, fun and lets her socialise with her friends.

Post reply on HN