501–510 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let me re-write your post with the opposite view. Both are unconvincing. I thought we'd learned our lesson with the silly cores Myth already? >>
I think you're misreading the comment you're replying to. Both "more cores is always better" and "more MHz is always better" are myths.
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?
Heh, that's not how I would describe MacBook Pros. ;)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do I need to select the most expensive M3 Max version (the one with 16 cores) to get 48 or 64 gigs of RAM. The M3 Max with 14 cores only allow 36 or 96 gigs. Just let me choose 14 cores and 64 gigs.
Wild guess but if the base chip has 3 channels and the higher binned chip has 4 channels: 3x6GB = 18GB 3x12GB = 36GB 3x32GB = 96GB 4x12GB = 48GB 4x16GB = 64GB 4x32GB = 128GB
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. ;)
What dev shop gives their engineers base model machines?
But with the general power of the base model Apple Silicon I don't think most dev shops really need the higher end models, honestly.
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 the productivity gains from upgrading can be quite large relative to the cost of upgrading, esp when you factor in the average salary in this community. I spend 8-10 hours on my Macbook every day. The amount of time I've saved / productivity I've gained by things just running faster and by being more mobile (much longer battery life) is huge compared to the $2000 price tag. Frugality is good but there are som…
I spend 8-10 hours a day coding on my 2018 MBP (web apps - Postgres and Rails or Python) but almost none of that is really CPU-bound in my case. The meat of my work, the actual coding and iteration, is not limited by the aging CPU.
The one thing that's painfully slow is rebuilding Docker images, but we don't do that too often. Less than once per week.
I actually am upgrading soon, but it is not going to make an amazing difference for me in terms of productivity in my current work.
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…
For the same reason professional mechanics in F1
don't use shitty tools to work on their cars.
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…
That said, if anyone would like to send me $4000, I will absolutely upgrade to a new 14" Macbook in a heartbeat.
I thought this was funny considering the original Myst can run on a modern toaster. I'm guessing they're referring to a new Myst re-release?