[deleted]
MacBook Neo
781–790 of 1001 posts
Re: MacBook Neo
#782Is A18 fully compatible with M series chips apps?
As others have pointed out, the original Apple Silicon development kit used the A12Z chip.
Re: MacBook Neo
#783This machine has me asking why much older hardware can't run newer versions of macOS. The answer of course is Apple needs to sell new machines, but the Neo may be proof that decade old Macs could run Tahoe as well as or better than the Neo.
Re: MacBook Neo
#784I guess PCs and chromebooks are over? Literally what normie would pay more for a worse experience now?
Re: MacBook Neo
#785This sounds great, but it pains me that I can't dual-boot my iPhone 15 Pro as a lightweight Mac. Would be great with an HDMI connector & BT keyboard/mouse.
I can't see Apple doing anything that'd make the iPhone not a usable phone while it's being used as a Mac. But I bet they could have macOS components running alongside iOS, in a VM/container of some sort. Would be very cool.
(Honestly I can't see Apple doing that either though since it'd cannibalize their other product lines. But c'mon, Apple!)
Re: MacBook Neo
#786List of differences from the MacBook Air: * Only supports 8 GB of unified memory * No MagSafe * One of the two USB-C ports is limited to USB 2.0 speeds of just 480 Mb/s * No Thunderbolt support means the Neo cannot drive either of Apple’s new Studio Displays. However, it can push a 4K display with 60Hz refresh rate over USB-C. * “Just” 16 hours of battery life, compared to the 18 hours quoted for the 13-inch MacBook…
— ...We believe that the customers will like it despite all that. We plan to market it as MacBook Nerfed.
— But you can't use "Nerfed", we'll run into a trademark dispute.
— Ah, well, you're right! Hey Claude, what generic lofty-sounding words start with "Ne"?
Re: MacBook Neo
#787List of differences from the MacBook Air: * Only supports 8 GB of unified memory * No MagSafe * One of the two USB-C ports is limited to USB 2.0 speeds of just 480 Mb/s * No Thunderbolt support means the Neo cannot drive either of Apple’s new Studio Displays. However, it can push a 4K display with 60Hz refresh rate over USB-C. * “Just” 16 hours of battery life, compared to the 18 hours quoted for the 13-inch MacBook…
Why didn't you list the number 1 difference, the price.
Re: MacBook Neo
#788This machine has me asking why much older hardware can't run newer versions of macOS. The answer of course is Apple needs to sell new machines, but the Neo may be proof that decade old Macs could run Tahoe as well as or better than the Neo.
I'm not sure this really makes sense. The single core performance for the iphone chip is leagues ahead of anything even a couple years old. They can likely increase clock speed of the iphone chip in a larger chassis so the performance isn't exactly 1:1 with the 16 pro, which was hardly a slacker. 8gb on apple silicon goes much further than 8gb would have on an intel chip, due to faster and on chip RAM and much faster storage to enable smoother use of swap.
I'd agree that an m1 chip can probably continue to run modern macOS for a very long time, and they will likely drop support for it much earlier than they would need to.
Re: MacBook Neo
#789Is there any world where them running MacOS on an A chip ultimately translates to just connecting an iPhone to a monitor, keyboard and mouse (all apple-branded, naturally :-) and running it in 'MacOS mode'? Obviously just so many reasons why this won't happen. Or would happen on iPad first. But dare we dream?
I would love this. Don't see it happening though unless it turns out that people really love the Android desktop mode. (Which, maybe, if/when it becomes basically their ChromeOS replacement.)
Re: MacBook Neo
#790This machine has me asking why much older hardware can't run newer versions of macOS. The answer of course is Apple needs to sell new machines, but the Neo may be proof that decade old Macs could run Tahoe as well as or better than the Neo.
> but the Neo may be proof that decades old macs could run Tahoe, and maybe as well or better than the Neo
The A18 Pro is going to out perform many "decades old" processors, which would you be referring to?
I wouldn't conflate "affordable" with "low-end" in terms of processing speed. Apple is able to get the price to this point because of decisions that the rest of the market did not make.