[HN Gopher] Apple Unveils M2
___________________________________________________________________
Apple Unveils M2
Author : yottabyte47
Score : 447 points
Date : 2022-06-06 18:33 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.apple.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.apple.com)
| a-dub wrote:
| how does m2 neural engine performance compare with popular
| contemporary nvidia laptop and desktop gpus?
| MikusR wrote:
| No VP9 or AV1 acceleration.
| out_of_protocol wrote:
| At least not mentioned. YouTube 4k will eat a lot of battery...
| turtlebits wrote:
| Why watch 4k on a 1664p screen?
| out_of_protocol wrote:
| Bitrate so much better, even on 1080p screen it looks nice
| The_Colonel wrote:
| You can connect an external 4K screen. Also higher bitrate
| makes it better looking even on lower res screens.
| bee_rider wrote:
| They would probably rather you watch videos on appleTV
| anyway.
| tokamak-teapot wrote:
| The M1 accelerates VP9
| perardi wrote:
| The M1 already has VP9 acceleration in the "media engine" chunk
| of the SoC.
|
| https://singhkays.com/blog/apple-silicon-m1-video-power-cons...
|
| Though Apple doesn't super explicitly say that.
|
| As for AV1...well, we don't really know yet. That's deep in the
| weeds, and it's entire possible the M2 does have accelerated
| decoding, but they just didn't spell that out yet.
| haunter wrote:
| I'll switch once I can play my full Steam library on a machine
| like this. The power is there for sure.
| vimy wrote:
| https://www.codeweavers.com/crossover
|
| Works surprisingly well. You can find videos on youtube.
| stetrain wrote:
| Yeah, I wish Valve and Apple would make nice (like they did
| back in the day for Steam on Mac) enough to:
|
| 1) Update all the first-party Valve games to 64-bit since the
| 32-bit binaries are no longer supported
|
| 2) Bring Proton support to MacOS, which is what Steam uses to
| run Windows games on Linux and the Steam Deck console.
| enragedcacti wrote:
| Apple would probably need to do the heavy lifting on (2) by
| either adding Vulkan support to their GPU drivers or by
| adding Metal support to Proton.
| yieldcrv wrote:
| I'm only a very casual gamer these days (although anyone I go
| on a date with would only see a gaming accessory or console and
| immediately think hardcore), I recently went down the gaming
| rabbithole to see what I can do with my M1.
|
| It seems like MacOS on M1 architecture can play almost
| everything! Like, there are so many titles that don't have OSX
| listed as ever being released for, but it can either be played
| out the box or with a slight tweak. But I guess that does
| preclude Steam releases if you don't have direct access to the
| per game, installers.
|
| And nowadays these indie games release on all major consoles,
| mobile, and windows, macos.
|
| What are you encountering? A few examples on whats missing for
| you?
| lapetitejort wrote:
| Three semi-broad examples, Elden Ring (Japanese dev),
| Horizon: Zero Dawn (Dutch dev, PS4 port), and Inscryption
| (indie dev) do not show MacOS support. I have not tried
| installing Windows-only games on a Mac. Can they be installed
| regardless if they don't show support? Does Valve have Mac-
| specific APIs to get them runnable like they do for Linux?
| culopatin wrote:
| Can you expand on "almost everything" and what you do to
| achieve that?
| yieldcrv wrote:
| I look at tables online that show game compatibility and
| experiences
|
| Its surprisingly good and I think this is partially because
| of Apple's network effects
|
| But aside from that the rosetta translations work really
| well, allowing a lot of x86/x64 to work
|
| And then there is Crossover which is a GUI for WINE
|
| And then VMs
|
| I got a Windows 95 game playing on my M1 yesterday with
| Crossover, more resource intensive stuff seems to be doing
| well too, with maybe flagship games failing some enthusiast
| benchmark
| david_allison wrote:
| Did you get any VR games working?
|
| https://www.applegamingwiki.com/wiki/Home paints a sorry
| picture of the state of M1 gaming (partially due to dropping
| 32 bit support).
| yieldcrv wrote:
| No VR! I'm sad I can't get to experience Half Life Alyx,
| but I mostly forget
| redox99 wrote:
| The comparison Apple makes with NVIDIA GPUs is _very_
| exaggerated. But yes, it should be able to game.
| qmmmur wrote:
| How do these on the new base model air compare to an m1 13"?
|
| Any benchmarks yet?
| cloudengineer94 wrote:
| Still only supports one display. Also they increased the prices
| across the board..
|
| Quite happy with my M1 Pro, a beat and a hell of a purchase.
| top_sigrid wrote:
| This is disappointing. It has 2 Thunderbolt 4 ports but can
| only drive one external display. So unnecessary, this would be
| the perfect machine for my home and work setup, but I have 2
| external displays in both cases.
| dougmwne wrote:
| Wait, you can't extend the display to a second screen?
| pdpi wrote:
| Only supports one _external_ display, as opposed to the 14
| "/16" machines that can do maybe 3 or 4?
| fumar wrote:
| 14 and 16 inch Macbook Pro's support multiple external
| screens up to 6K. https://www.apple.com/macbook-
| pro-14-and-16/specs/
| zydex wrote:
| That's the case for the M1 Pro and M1 Ultra. The regular M1
| only supports a single external display.
| seppel wrote:
| The M2 as well, unfortunately.
| msh wrote:
| Yes but only one external display plus the build in display.
| ryanmcbride wrote:
| Wait really? I was using 2 external displays alongside the
| built in desplay on my m1 just a few days ago. Or is it a
| limitation only with m1 mb airs?
| coder543 wrote:
| > on my m1 just a few days ago
|
| M1 != M1 Pro/Max/Ultra.
|
| If you have an M1 Pro or M1 Max or M1 Ultra, that is not
| "[your] m1".
|
| Each chip has significantly different capabilities in a
| number of aspects. As far as display support goes,
|
| M1 = 1 external display[0]
|
| M1 Pro = 2 external displays
|
| M1 Max = 4 external displays (3 USB-C + 1 HDMI)[1]
|
| [0]: the exception is the M1 Mac Mini, which doesn't have
| an internal display, so it can use two external displays.
|
| [1]: once again, the desktop version without a built-in
| monitor can support one additional monitor, so the Mac
| Studio with M1 Max can support 5 displays.
| dumpsterdiver wrote:
| Is there a technical reason that the M1 only supports a
| single external monitor (optimized intended experience),
| or is just market segmentation?
| coder543 wrote:
| Every GPU on the market supports a limited number of
| monitors. There are fixed-function (not programmable in a
| traditional sense) blocks of silicon that are used to
| support each monitor.
|
| M1's GPU came equipped to only support the internal
| monitor and one external monitor... a very slim
| configuration, but that's likely influenced by its
| smartphone processor ancestry. Smartphones don't need to
| power a bunch of displays.
|
| The larger M1 chips have bigger GPUs with more of those
| fixed function blocks.
|
| It isn't artificial market segmentation at a software
| level, but it is certainly market segmentation at a
| hardware level, and something they knew would happen when
| they designed these chips.
|
| In the end, they were pretty spot on about the market
| segments. Most people want/need external display
| support... but one external display is plenty for most
| people. People who need more are likely to also want more
| in general, and the higher end options satisfy that.
|
| It still would have been nice for them to upgrade things
| for M2.
| ryanmcbride wrote:
| Got it, I thought they were saying it was a limitation of
| the chip not the specific laptop they had. Thanks for the
| clarification!
| imwillofficial wrote:
| M1 Ultra = Every display known to man.
| coder543 wrote:
| Apple probably could support 10 displays off of M1 Ultra,
| but I guess they decided to leave some displays for the
| rest of us.
| conductr wrote:
| Does the 13" MBP support multiple displays?
|
| Sorry- I'm horrible at reading Apple Specs and inferring
| the capabilities
| ccouzens wrote:
| just the one external screen (two screens total including
| internal).
|
| https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-13/specs/
|
| People have gotten round it by connecting additional
| screens using display link adapters.
| ig-88ms wrote:
| Display Link is alrightish for light office work or
| coding. But not much else.
| opan wrote:
| Can you use two external screens if you disable the
| internal screen? That's what I do now with a ThinkPad.
| conductr wrote:
| Awesome thanks for the assist! That page makes it clear,
| I guess I'm actually just horrible at sifting through the
| marketing to find the spec page :)
| freewizard wrote:
| My 13" 2014 MBP supports 2 mDP + 1 HDMI = total 3
| external displays.
|
| Running external display at 4k@60Hz is possible but not
| straight forward, it requires patch core graphic
| framework, or using 3rd party boot loader. Newer models
| do not have this limitation afaik.
| hda111 wrote:
| Intel != Apple Silicon
| caycep wrote:
| There was some dock from a 3rd party vendor that let you do
| more screens, but I can't remember which one...
| imposterr wrote:
| There are a few. They are able to do this by using
| something called Display Stream Compression. While it may
| be find for some, a lot of us would prefer not to have a
| diminished experience with a compressed stream.
| herpderperator wrote:
| DSC doesn't solve the hardware limitation of only being
| able to drive a single external display on the M1, that's
| a hardware thing that cannot be changed. You have
| confused it with DisplayLink, which is basically another
| graphics card, hence why it "solves" this problem, but
| the experience is worse because it's CPU-
| intensive/software rendered.
| coder543 wrote:
| Display Stream Compression (DSC) is fine. It is not a
| "diminished experience". DSC is visually lossless.
|
| Instead, those docks use a technology called DisplayLink
| which has nothing to do with DSC. DisplayLink means that
| external monitors are basically "software" displays that
| are tremendously slower and often very limited in
| resolutions and frame rates. Having any DisplayLink
| display connected also breaks HDCP and can cause other
| problems.
| mrob wrote:
| The relevant standard is proprietary, but Wikipedia
| quotes it, confirming that "visually lossless" is
| marketing lies:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort#Display_Stream_
| Com...
| coder543 wrote:
| "Marketing lies" is unnecessarily inflammatory. I googled
| before posting to see if I could find anyone legitimately
| complaining about DSC, and it really seemed like pretty
| much everyone was happy with it.
|
| There are always people like "audiophiles" who claim to
| be able to distinguish impossibly small differences, and
| there is perhaps a very small number of people with
| exceptional hearing who actually do... but 320kbps
| compressed audio is "audibly lossless" for most of the
| population. The exact same thing applies here, by all
| appearances. I'm sure there are mp3 test cases where the
| compression does something terrible, just like with
| DSC... that just isn't what people actually encounter day
| to day.
|
| I can't see the second study linked which is on IEEE, but
| if you look at the fist one, Figure 4 shows that DSC was
| "visually lossless" in almost all test cases. Let me
| quote one thing from that study:
|
| > As described above, the HDR content was selected to
| challenge the codecs, in spite of this both DSC 1.2a and
| VDC-M performed very well. This finding is consistent
| with previous series of experiments using SDR images.
|
| So, this testing was done with samples that would
| challenge the codecs... and they still did great. It
| doesn't appear to be "marketing lies" at all. It appears
| to be a genuine attempt to describe a technology that
| enables new capabilities while dealing with the imperfect
| limitation in bandwidth of the available hardware.
|
| Do you have some terrible personal experience with DSC to
| share? Did you do a blind test so that you weren't aware
| of whether DSC was enabled or not when making your
| judgments? Are you aware that almost all non-OLED
| monitors (especially high refresh rate) _always_ have
| artifacts around motion, even without DSC?
|
| I haven't personally had a chance to test out DSC other
| than perhaps some short experiences, which is why I based
| my initial comment on googling what other people
| experienced and how Wikipedia describes it. You pointed
| me to a study which seems to confirm that DSC is
| perfectly fine.
| mrob wrote:
| >in almost all test cases
|
| Common sense suggests that "visually lossless" means no
| detectable difference by the naked eye _ever_ , not in
| "almost all test cases". MP3 is a very old codec, and
| it's possible that there are still some "killer samples"
| that can be ABXed by skilled listeners with good
| equipment even when encoded by a modern version of LAME.
| A better example of something that could reasonably
| called "audibly lossless" might be something like Opus at
| 160kbps, for which I've seen no evidence of any
| successful ABX. But even that is is usually called
| "transparent", not "audibly lossless", so not only is
| "visually lossless" a lie, the name itself is propaganda.
| coder543 wrote:
| > Common sense suggests that "visually lossless" means no
| detectable difference by the naked eye ever, not in
| "almost all test cases".
|
| Common sense suggests no such thing. When you buy a
| bottle of "water", it actually has a bunch of stuff in it
| that _isn't_ water. How dare they?! When someone says
| "we'll be there in 15 minutes", it is highly unlikely
| that they will show up in exactly 900 seconds. Such
| liars! Why are you even meeting them? This is common
| across basically everything in life. "There are no
| absolutes." If you think common sense is to
| _automatically assume_ every absolute is intended to be
| taken absolutely... that is not common. Short statements
| will come off as absolute, when they are just intended to
| be taken as approximate.
|
| "Visually lossless" is a description of the _by far_ most
| common experience with DSC. They're not describing it as
| truly lossless, so you know there is _some_ loss
| occurring. It is natural to assume that in extraordinary
| circumstances, that loss might be noticeable side by
| side... but you don't have a side by side when using a
| monitor most of the time, so the _very lossy_ human
| vision system will happily ignore small imperfections.
|
| > so not only is "visually lossless" a lie, the name
| itself is propaganda.
|
| Your whole comment shows that you don't understand how
| communication works. It _is_ "visually lossless" as far
| as people are concerned. The study shows that! This is
| not at all what propaganda looks like.
|
| When Apple labeled their iPhone screen a "retina screen"
| because people would no longer notice the pixels, I
| suppose you called that a "lie" as well because you could
| lean in really close or use a microscope? The retina
| display density achieved its stated goal.
|
| There is literally no point in continuing this discussion
| when you take such an absolutist position and refuse to
| consider what alternative communications would look like.
| How about "99.9% visually lossless"? That would be even
| more confusing to people.
|
| Communicating complicated concepts succinctly is a lossy
| process. As they say, "all models are wrong, but some are
| useful."
| no_butterscotch wrote:
| I bought and followed the online tutorials about using
| the DisplayLink docks and whatever else I purchased from
| Amazon and I couldn't get it to work with 2 external
| monitors. It isn't straightforward.
| pishpash wrote:
| They did? Seems to be the same price as M1 MacBook Pro.
| dmix wrote:
| > It also delivers 50 percent more memory bandwidth
|
| Anyone know if this means much in practice for a typical dev
| user?
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| All i want is a laptop with similar build quality, battery life,
| and Ubuntu.
| baxtr wrote:
| The really interesting question: how much would you be willing
| to pay for it?
| hedora wrote:
| I'm pretty price insensitive, but nothing on the market comes
| close to what I'd like:
|
| - One week suspend, resume under linux (reliable).
|
| - Keyboard and trackpad centered under display, and as good
| as best of class from 10 years ago.
|
| - 4K / hidpi display
|
| - no/minimal fan, cool running
|
| - 12+ hour "typical" battery life; at least 4 when running
| slack and zoom (and maybe compilation jobs)
|
| - as fast as a 10 year old midrange desktop e.g. i7: 2700)
|
| - don't care about video acceleration, but video out must
| reliably work.
|
| - No dual GPU switchover garbage.
|
| - not intel brand (the last N Intel machines I have used have
| had severe chipset/cpu issues)
|
| - ability to not run systemd in a supported config.
|
| All the laptops I have found fail on multiple of these
| points. My pine book pro meets as many of them as most high
| end laptops do (so, not all that many), but at least it was
| cheap and worked out of the box.
|
| Still waiting for a "real" laptop to replace it, but
| everything I've seen has glaring fatal flaws.
| jckahn wrote:
| The same as what it currently costs, personally.
| corrral wrote:
| A major factor in achieving excellent battery life coupled with
| relatively good performance & responsiveness, on Apple
| products, is the OS. That holds for both Macs and iDevices.
| smlacy wrote:
| So you're saying that BSD has better power management than
| Linux? Would love to see some real research and analysis on
| this.
| [deleted]
| corrral wrote:
| My claim is that macOS and iOS have far better power
| management than Linux or Windows, or Android, respectively.
| Possibly that's directly due to their BSD heritage, but I
| doubt it.
| ladyanita22 wrote:
| mwcampbell wrote:
| Apple's kernel isn't merely one of the BSD derivatives. And
| of course their userland is mostly proprietary.
| atq2119 wrote:
| It's not a BSD vs. Linux thing. It's the entire software
| stack including user space, e.g. how much is the CPU woken
| up by silly background tasks doing useless things. That
| thing can be fixed regardless of the underlying kernel _if
| people care enough_. The total investment in desktop Linux
| is tiny compared to what Apple puts into macOS.
| olliej wrote:
| No, macOS does its own power management - the base kernel
| may be BSD, but macOS has vastly more work in it than
| simply shipping a basic BSD system.
| Klonoar wrote:
| The base kernel is not really BSD.
|
| https://wiki.freebsd.org/Myths#FreeBSD_is_Just_macOS_With
| out...
|
| >Darwin - which consists of the XNU kernel, IOkit (a
| driver model), and POSIX compatibility via a BSD
| compatibility layer - makes up part of macOS (as well as
| iOS, tvOS, and others) includes a few subsystems (such as
| the VFS, process model, and network implementation) from
| (older versions of) FreeBSD, but is mostly an independent
| implementation. The similarities in the userland,
| however, make it much easier to port macOS code to
| FreeBSD than any other system - partially because a lot
| of command-line utilities were imported along with the
| BSD bits from FreeBSD. For example, both libdispatch
| (Grand Central Dispatch in Apple's marketing) and libc++
| were written for macOS and worked on FreeBSD before any
| other OS.
| nicoburns wrote:
| Yes, although I think a lot of the issue is generic hardware
| drivers that don't necessarily configure things correctly,
| and it looks like the Asiago linux people are paying a lot of
| attention to power management, so it may end up having decent
| battery life too.
| ActorNightly wrote:
| There are several android phones that compete with the iphone
| 13 pro performance wise, while running a much less optimized
| os.
|
| Likewise in the desktop world, the single core performance of
| the M1 is on par with top of the line chips, and M2 will be
| the same, and intel and amd work fine on linux.
|
| Apples decision to keep a locked box has nothing to do with
| performance, solely to do with keeping people in the
| ecosystem for revenue.
| corrral wrote:
| The "coupled with" was important. They hit a spot on the
| performance/responsiveness/power-use graph that others
| don't, and a lot of that's due to software, not just
| hardware. It's easy to get incredible battery life if you
| accept poor performance, or to have great performance by
| sacrificing battery life, but Apple does the extra work to
| achieve both. Kinda like how BeOS used to feel way smoother
| than Windows or (GUI) Linux _even when running on far worse
| hardware_.
| zlsa wrote:
| I'm aware benchmarks don't tell the whole story, but
| Geekbench shows the iPhone 13 Pro[0] significantly
| outperforming the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra[1] - about 60%
| faster multicore (presumably thermally limited?) and ~80%
| faster singlecore.
|
| [0]:
| https://browser.geekbench.com/ios_devices/iphone-13-pro
| [1]: https://browser.geekbench.com/android_devices/samsung-
| sm-s90...
| mathstuf wrote:
| I like the XPS 13 line myself. The 93xx line lasted all night
| when I forgot to shut the lid one evening (9+ hours) with
| Fedora (after running `powertop` and doing its tweaks).
|
| But I'm also a "weirdo" who doesn't like Apple-made hardware
| (the trackpad, touchbar, keyboard, mouse, etc. are all inferior
| IMO), so maybe you're looking for something different there.
| rolisz wrote:
| My XPS 13 9360 randomly turns on when the lid is closed and
| burns through the battery. There was an official document at
| some point saying that if you put it in your backpack in
| sleep mode, it voids the warranty.
|
| I really like the laptop otherwise, but battery/power
| management is utter crap on it, both on Windows and on Linux.
| mathstuf wrote:
| I've noticed this too, but it seems Bluetooth related.
| There's a report with the Linux kernel, but no progress as
| yet.
|
| See this thread:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31521995
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| I was eyeing an XPS like of notebooks for many years, but
| comments like the ones in sibling threads are holding me back
| from acting upon it.
| okwubodu wrote:
| > But I'm also a "weirdo" who doesn't like Apple-made
| hardware
|
| Please, it's not _that_ weird of an opinion.
|
| > (the trackpad [...] are all inferior IMO)
|
| Oh.
|
| But I think I agree when it comes to anything like drag-and-
| drop.
| mikepurvis wrote:
| I'm currently on my first and last XPS, a 9570. I _really_
| wanted to love it, but there 's just too much about it that
| is a complete disaster, particularly around power management,
| wake behaviour, and thermals.
|
| I know I haven't exactly babied it, what with it having been
| plugged in in my home office for basically two straight years
| during the pandemic, but the battery is shot at this point--
| getting barely an hour of life. Often it'll be supposedly
| sleeping in lid-shut mode but be cooking itself for no
| reason. Then it'll wake up and immediately go into a power-
| panic shutdown, only to assert that the battery is full after
| all when it reboots connected to juice. And now the HDMI port
| is also toast (verified under multiple OSes to be a hardware
| issue).
|
| Maybe I just got a bad year, but this is supposed to be
| Dell's premium machine and I don't think I can justify giving
| them another chance after this. It's just nowhere near
| reliable enough to be used on the road, and not performant
| enough to be a true desktop replacement. So I don't know who
| is using this machine and for what.
| jcranberry wrote:
| I had a 9520 for about 5 years. I had two issues, which was
| a broken left hinge (4k touch screen was two heavy for that
| part, I believe in the XPS 15 actually didn't suffer from
| the same issue), and swelling batteries, which caused
| various knock on issues. I also experienced the same issue
| with batteries from the dell latitude I got from work.
| Seemed to be a dell thing for laptops left plugged in
| constantly. I never had to deal with overheating issues
| despite having a Xeon (although it did get quite hot).
|
| Its a shame because otherwise I really liked the laptop.
| Gorgeous screen, good trackpad and keyboard, and a perfect
| size imo.
| tikkabhuna wrote:
| I've had the same experience with my XPS 9560. Past few
| years I've had "TPM device is not detected"[1] issues.
| Tried all the different solutions and nothings fixed it.
| Dell have never addressed it with a BIOS update.
|
| I don't want to go back to OS X, but its hard to find good
| build quality and a high res screen.
|
| Also, my battery was terrible after a couple of years. I
| had it plugged in as well. I bought a replacement this year
| and it was easy enough to switch out. Hopefully I can just
| keep this going and use it as an RDP machine.
|
| [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/Dell/comments/onvh42/xps_9560_
| tpm_d...
| peteri wrote:
| I had the same issue, for me updating the TPM firmware
| solved the issue (but it is convoluted)
|
| https://superuser.com/questions/1668861/alert-tpm-device-
| is-...
|
| My guess is that Dell didn't update the TPM firware, my
| guess is this breaks some keys so can't be done
| automatically and a BIOS update at some point then screws
| up the handshake with the older TPM firmware unless the
| laptop is fully powered off.
|
| But I'm not a huge fan of dell hardware.
| mathstuf wrote:
| > with it having been plugged in in my home office for
| basically two straight years during the pandemic
|
| Yeah, my second seems to have succumbed to that as well.
| There's a setting in the BIOS that says "I plan on keeping
| this plugged in all the time" and it'll do better battery
| management that way.
| sliken wrote:
| My mbp automatically enables that after being plugged in
| for awhile, by setting the max threshold to 80% or
| something. The mbp warned me in the battery monitor I
| think. Nice, because I wasn't even thinking of such
| things.
| mathstuf wrote:
| That's the kind of thing that Linux tends to miss out on.
| But I don't feel that selling my computing experience to
| Cupertino is worth such things either.
| duped wrote:
| I think the real garbage part of buying an XPS from Dell
| for professional developer work on Linux is that they will
| not provide any support for the device. Particularly when
| you report driver, sleep, or other software level issues
| that they ostensibly provide with OEM installed Linux.
| rashkov wrote:
| Yeah my 15" xps was pretty bad too. Coworker and I both had
| this issue where one key press would result in the same
| letter being typed twice. Coworker sent his machine back
| several times but never got that fixed. I just used an
| external keyboard most of the time. Besides that, my
| machine's battery ultimately puffed up and made the
| trackpad impossible to click.
| lostlogin wrote:
| What are you after in a trackpad? I think this is the best
| feature of the laptops.
| mathstuf wrote:
| I am rough with mine (my first uses were on some IBM tank
| from the late 80s/early 90s when I was young and a Lenovo
| T61 in college). Spurious clicks and taps happen all the
| time when I end up using the things. I have spent _minutes_
| trying to get an Apple trackpad to perform to drag and drop
| and instead having it do every other thing from extra
| clicks on the way to zooming to running out of space when I
| get to the edge trying to get where I 'm going. The fact
| that you can SSH in and use a more exacting interface is
| the best feature of the things IMO, but sometimes the UI is
| just the only way to get something done.
|
| I also liked the matte texture of the ThinkPad, but I think
| that era is over (the XPS isn't glassy like Apple's at
| least, but still lacks texture).
| thebean11 wrote:
| Have you tried 3 finger drag? So much nicer than needing
| to apply pressure.
| mathstuf wrote:
| Doesn't that swipe between desktops/workspaces/whatever?
| On that note, I have no idea how anyone is supposed to
| discover these gestures. I had the same problem when I
| had an iPhone for a few months (long story): I became
| afraid to swipe anything because I never knew what
| anything would do and the lag on the thing meant that
| some widget could show up under my finger without knowing
| (something I really dislike about reflowing and
| progressively loaded websites too). The floating dot
| thing was also way more invasive than a button too.
|
| FWIW, I have animation time set to 0 on my Android phone
| to avoid these kinds of behaviors but given that the
| primary interaction was through them on Apple, it was
| unavoidable.
| flatiron wrote:
| Framework is the closest I believe. Personally I buy used
| thinkpads. Huge bang for the buck and they are pretty much
| bullet proof. That being said my daily driver is a 2013 MacBook
| Air running arch now.
| dheera wrote:
| For hardware specs and upgradeability yes. I have one. I love
| how I paid market price for third-party 4TB SSD and 64GB of
| RAM and not Apple's 4X market price.
|
| For build quality I think they're still behind Asus, Lenovo,
| and Samsung.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| Yes, I think so too now. But they don't ship to where I live,
| and their battery life is reportedly 3-4 times shorter than
| Air's. I understand that processors are a biggest cause of
| it. (No AMD option for Framework is also a very big minus in
| my eyes)
| yoavm wrote:
| My X1 Yoga from 5 years ago still answers all the above, IMHO.
| I replaced the battery (myself) about a year ago. Build quality
| is great, and I think you can even get it preinstalled with
| Ubuntu. If you're not into the touchscreen-yoga thing, the X1
| Carbon is pretty similar.
| rvz wrote:
| Choose two features between: _' Similar build quality'_, _'
| battery life'_, _' Ubuntu'_.
| jacooper wrote:
| I think you should be hopeful for Aeshi Linux.
| AYoung010 wrote:
| Do you mean Asahi?
| jacooper wrote:
| Yes, fixed it.
| kjeetgill wrote:
| FYI- If you meant to edit your post it's not showing up
| as fixed for me at least.
| [deleted]
| cevn wrote:
| Asahi Linux. And it is awesome, the future is here. Just
| waiting for the GPU driver and ... suspend... and brightness
| and sound.
| gigatexal wrote:
| Yeah. As soon as it's got feature parity I am getting an m1
| Mac to run Linux with i3. And no don't mention magnet it's
| not the same.
| least wrote:
| You could try Yabai [1], but it's a bspwm clone not an i3
| clone. Still not as zippy as the TWMs on linux, but a
| pretty decent experience overall. There's also Amethyst
| [2] which kind of replicates xmonad. In most ways they're
| worse than using the linux ones, though at least you
| retain the full features of Aqua and Quartz, while trying
| to integrate i3 or other TWMs with a proper DE in linux
| remains to be a hassle.
|
| [1] https://github.com/koekeishiya/yabai
|
| [2] https://ianyh.com/amethyst/
| freedomben wrote:
| I really think that's what the Framework will be in a couple of
| years. I use one now and it's pretty great, but does have a few
| (totally acceptable to me) rough edges that they're working on.
| mnholt wrote:
| I don't mean to discredit Framework in the slightest but they
| are still leagues away from Apple when it comes to build
| quality.
|
| The entire industry struggles to match Apple's fit and
| finish, it will be an uphill battle for a hardware based
| startup. I do hope they succeed.
| [deleted]
| dheera wrote:
| Yep, I have a Framework laptop. I really hope Sand Hill Road
| doesn't kill it. They will almost definitely need another
| round or two at to hit profitability.
| duped wrote:
| As a framework owner, there's maybe two orders of magnitude
| difference in build quality between a mac and a framework.
|
| The track pad and display suck for a laptop in 2022. The
| display has issues with calibration and resolution
| (understandable from where they're at right now, but still
| it's trash compared to an XPS or MB). The trackpad has
| mechanical issues that cause it to wiggle, its been reported
| on the forum (and personally to staff a few times) but they
| don't seem to have a decent way to fix it.
|
| Its been a nightmare calibrating the touchpad to my liking,
| on my XPS and Macbook it has always "just worked" (even on
| Linux!)
| smlacy wrote:
| Exactly how do you quantify "two orders of magnitude of
| build quality"? What units are you using for this analysis?
| cjaybo wrote:
| I think "maybe" is an important part of the text you
| quoted, and the rest of the comment goes into decent
| detail regarding the specific areas where the experience
| fell short of their expectations.
|
| Did you stop reading after the first paragraph?
| gameswithgo wrote:
| lynguist wrote:
| What about the very same laptop running native Debian?
|
| How to install: https://git.zerfleddert.de/cgi-
| bin/gitweb.cgi/m1-debian/
| [deleted]
| dheera wrote:
| This. I hate MacOS with a passion.
| mwcampbell wrote:
| Surely it would be better to save one's passionate hatred for
| things that actually rise to that level, such as things that
| hurt people who can't just choose an alternative. I prefer to
| think of mere differences between operating systems as
| neither good nor bad, just different, and use whatever is
| most practical in any given circumstance, while trying not to
| get emotionally worked up about its downsides.
| kristiandupont wrote:
| Everything about it or the developer experience? I use a VM
| for my dev work and then run the rest (which pretty much
| means "a browser", these days) in MacOS. Which works
| perfectly.
| dheera wrote:
| Almost everything about it. It's pretty unusable for me
| all-around and just gets in the way of almost all my
| engineering.
|
| I use Ubuntu for everything, and customize almost
| everything.
|
| Ubuntu VM in a Mac isn't what I want. I want full access to
| all capabilities of the system, and no hassles with using
| all my GPU, RAM, and direct access to all disks and
| hardware interfaces. If I'm just going to sit in Ubuntu all
| day with VM resources maxed out, I might as well it be the
| host OS not the guest OS.
| thayne wrote:
| Not the original poster, but for me, everything. I'm the
| sort of user who likes to customize everything, and Mac
| (and other apple products) makes it hard to customize
| anything.
|
| And I'm the kind of developer who will make pull requests
| to fix bugs that bother me, so everything being proprietary
| rather than open source is also a big pain point.
| mrweasel wrote:
| Nothing wrong with that, and I have no point other than
| I'm facinated by your approach to computing. I customize
| my iTerm2 theme, tweak Vim a bit, increase the cursor
| size and I'm done. What I want is to be able to get a new
| laptop, login to my password manager and be working
| within 15 minutes.
| speed_spread wrote:
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| That's a lot of anger you're packing around there for an
| operating system lol
| speed_spread wrote:
| Yeah, that was my 1984-like daily minute of hate, except
| that Goldstein is now an OS. Better than hating people I
| guess? Also, other than "smugfaced", I believe I stayed
| pretty factual in my description. Still, gotta fullfil my
| obligations to the Party and all that, lest they start
| suspecting me...
| genewitch wrote:
| Microsoft Windows Millennium Edition(tm)
| jamiek88 wrote:
| I personally don't understand the whole concept of
| 'hating' someone else's personal choice of OS.
|
| I mean if the government mandated MacOS maybe you'd have
| a mature point instead of an infantile rant.
| speed_spread wrote:
| Someone expresses general displeasure with MacOS ->
| lambda Mac user has to come and say "It works for me,
| your opinion is thus misplaced". Every. Time. I don't
| know what's more infantile.
| dr-detroit wrote:
| slaw wrote:
| I am waiting for HP Dev One. https://hpdevone.com/
| yoyohello13 wrote:
| I wish I could get something like this from System76.
| watmough wrote:
| Maybe consider a ThinkPad P1 Gen 4.
|
| $$$ but can be had for 40% off.
|
| A good spec with the nice screen and discrete graphics is <
| $3k.
|
| Upsides: Great for Ubuntu, everything just works. Screen is
| beautiful. Keyboard is brilliant.
|
| Downsides: Can get hot. Battery life sucks. Still 11th gen -
| Tiger Lake.
| jotm wrote:
| My honest advice: Don't get HP. Except for the highest end
| ZBooks, _maybe_.
|
| They all have severe drawbacks in some way. They even used
| the Elitebook brand to make cheap shit and now no one likes
| it. Gamers wanted the Omen, turned out to be shit.
|
| I bet the thermals are horrible, the keyboard sucks and/or
| will break in a year or two, the battery life will be bad,
| the BIOS updates will cause problems with no way to revert,
| the drives may suddenly fail and Linux still won't work
| properly on them :D
| david_allison wrote:
| Would a Ubuntu arm64 VM running under macOS be worthwhile?
| lynguist wrote:
| I work on an Ubuntu VM running in Parallels on a Mac M1 to
| target a Raspberry Pi.
|
| It's the very best such setup possible.
| anonymouse008 wrote:
| It's very interesting to think the processor releases were
| holding back the Mac for so long. They are on the cusp on turning
| Macs into annual upgrades - with meaningful performance upgrades
| tied to the OS, just like they've done for a decade with the A
| series / iOS releases.
|
| This is firing on all cylinders. The organizational structure and
| performance is a marvel for this.
| samstave wrote:
| colinmhayes wrote:
| Apple's whole thing is simplicity/"just works". Modular
| designs are pretty much the opposite of that. They've been
| proven right too. The vast majority of people don't want to
| slot in their own parts.
| bogwog wrote:
| > They've been proven right too. The vast majority of
| people don't want to slot in their own parts.
|
| How have they been "proven right"? Correlation is not
| causation. Just because they're highly successful and they
| ship integrated components doesn't mean the two are
| related.
| deltaonefour wrote:
| What has been proven is that consumers don't care about
| customization too much.
|
| If they want it, they don't want it that much.
| bogwog wrote:
| How has that been "proven"? If your argument is that
| people are still buying Macs despite the lack of
| customization, well that's ignoring the state of the
| market. Most consumers only have two choices (Mac or
| Windows), and oftentimes it comes down to familiarity
| with one OS over the other, rather than any specific
| features or merits of the actual product.
|
| If Apple released a "customizable" Mac, or one that could
| be upgraded like a standard PC, do you believe that would
| sell poorly? I highly doubt it.
| kube-system wrote:
| Modular laptops currently exist, and have existed in
| multiple incarnations over their entire existence. They
| always flop in the mass market.
|
| People in the tech community want modularity and
| upgradability. But you must remember that tech forums are
| tiny bubbles. The mass market overwhelmingly DGAF.
|
| If you want to be successful at selling laptops to a tiny
| market, it is possible. You will have a company that
| looks like Framework or System76.
| bogwog wrote:
| This thread isn't very useful since my original comment
| wasn't clear enough, and it seems like people are
| misinterpreting my point, and then making assumptions
| about those interpretations.
|
| * I'm not saying Apple _should_ make a "modular laptop",
| just disagreeing with the idea that users wouldn't buy
| one.
|
| * I'm also not talking about Framework-style modularity,
| but "simple" things like swapping out the hard drive and
| RAM, two things you can't do on Macs or Macbooks anymore.
|
| Even if the average consumer wouldn't ever think to swap
| out those components themselves, the modularity would
| directly lead to longer lifespans for devices, lower
| repair costs, and (significantly) less e-waste. There are
| many regular non-tech people who would want those
| benefits.
| kube-system wrote:
| I'm following. Modular designs are not without tradeoff.
| Using memory on a board requires different types of
| memory (i.e. not LPDDRX), which have different
| performance and power characteristics. It requires
| changes to packaging and the overall design to facilitate
| that modularity. It changes their ability to share
| subcomponent designs with other products in their
| offerings. It introduces opportunities for commercial
| third-party modifications, which can be of varying
| quality. It requires a larger BOM. And it changes the
| mechanics of product tiering.
|
| All of these attributes influence factors for which the
| mass market does consider when buying laptops.
| bogwog wrote:
| All true, but what I'm saying is that nothing has been
| "proven". The market has not decided that this is what it
| wants, _Apple_ has. They have a pure monopoly on the
| market for Mac-compatible hardware, so whatever they do
| is immune to the regular market forces which would
| normally require them to make different product
| decisions.
|
| So again, whatever Apple manages to sell does not really
| reflect the reality of the market, since they 100%
| control that particular market. To say that consumers
| don't want something because Apple says so, is just
| wrong. Maybe Apple is right (and this isn't just a
| decision that's beneficial to their already-obscene
| margins), but there's no way to know. Hence, it is not
| "proven" in any meaningful way.
| kube-system wrote:
| Apple's laptops compete in the same market for laptops
| that others do. I _definitely_ doubt that Apple 's
| customers prioritize modularity more than Linux or
| Windows users. Very likely the opposite. Yet, the most
| popular devices of any OS are moving towards non-modular
| designs.
| simonh wrote:
| There has been tons of research in this. Of consumer
| machines capable of being upgraded, only a low single
| digit percentage of them ever are.
|
| Factor in issues with driver support and updates for
| arbitrary hardware, the weight premium for upgradability,
| compromises in chassis rigidity and resilience to add
| removable panels and it's just hugely wasteful and
| compromises quality for the vast majority of owners.
| bogwog wrote:
| Can you cite any of this research? I'm not doubting your
| claims, I'm legitimately curious.
| deltaonefour wrote:
| It's proven through consumer choice of laptops over
| desktops. Proof is in the sales figures. Consumers choose
| a less customizable product over one that is customizable
| indicating logically that some features are more
| important then customizability.
|
| Which continues to be in line with what I said. Consumers
| don't care about it as much. It is proof. Please refute
| this claim or acknowledge you are wrong. Thanks.
| bogwog wrote:
| Now I know you're just trolling me
| robertlagrant wrote:
| It's not univariate, but if the software outweighs
| hardware modularity then that's useful information.
| samstave wrote:
| chaostheory wrote:
| The reason why their ecosystem "just works" is because
| it's a tightly controlled vertically inte grated prison.
| The second you allow choice and a multitude of hardware
| and software configurations is when you start seeing
| complexity for users as well as instability.
| bogwog wrote:
| I'm not saying they should, just disagreeing with the
| idea that it's a proven thing. Apple likely has many
| reasons for not selling a user-configurable Mac, but I
| don't believe "users don't want it" is in that list of
| reasons.
|
| For example, customers definitely want lower prices, and
| a modular/user-upgradable Mac would clearly offer that
| (e.g. upgrading the stock hard drive with something much
| bigger, faster, and cheaper). So to say that Apple
| doesn't do it because users don't want it is simply
| wrong.
| wrs wrote:
| Not sure if you're aware that Apple doesn't use stock
| hard drives, they use raw Flash and implement their own
| controller. Part of the aforementioned vertical
| optimization of performance (and security in this case).
|
| Anyway, yes, this argument always comes down to whether
| enough people want a larger, slower, less reliable, more
| configurable, more upgradeable device, and it's hard to
| know for sure without trying the expensive experiment. At
| least we got some ports back!
| [deleted]
| ntoskrnl wrote:
| Ease up bronco. You can buy a https://frame.work/ if modular
| upgrades are important to you.
| xattt wrote:
| What would dripping the ball look like at this point in the
| game? Mediocre annual upgrades?
| seabriez wrote:
| LMAO yeah 8 GB - 256 Laptop for $1200 is "killing it;" duping
| consumers definitely from day 1.
| babypuncher wrote:
| Go find an x86 laptop that gets the same performance and
| battery life in a similar form factor for less than $1200
| smoldesu wrote:
| Counterpoint: M2 is a tock release, not a tick. This is pretty
| much the same behavior that ended up getting Intel shot in the
| foot: leaning too heavily on marginal performance increases
| from process enhancement will bite you in the butt when your
| competitors get their tech on your node. Intel and AMD are both
| going to be on 5nm in 2023, Apple should be pretty worried if
| _this_ is what they 're fighting with. 3nm isn't even getting
| taped off until 2024 AFAIK, so this really does feel like
| Apple's "Skylake" moment, as far as desktop CPU architecture is
| concerned.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| Spend a few minutes talking with someone who designs
| hardware. Often when they release something, there are TONs
| of incremental improvements that they just didn't have time
| to get to when a new product is released.
|
| I remember having a conversation with someone who worked on
| hard drives in the 80s. He got so ^%$^$# excited telling me
| about all the improvements he worked on between generations;
| they were mostly things like tighter calibrations, and
| refinements.
|
| Point being: Don't knock releases like this.
| FullyFunctional wrote:
| Indeed, that "18%" improvement is almost certainly made up
| of very many 1% improvements (or more likely, many
| improvements that each only makes difference in some
| scenarios).
| reaperducer wrote:
| _that "18%" improvement is almost certainly made up of
| very many 1% improvements_
|
| My guess is 18 of them.
| jsight wrote:
| I'd guess 17, but I guess it depends on whether they
| compound. :)
| smoldesu wrote:
| This comment sounds like the exact same hopium I heard
| about Intel in 2016. I get what you're saying, and there
| are definitely smaller changes packed in here, but _my
| point_ is that Apple 's performance crown is looking mighty
| easy to usurp right about now. Hell, they even showed a
| graph with the i7 1280p beating the M2's single-core
| performance by ~20% at the WWDC today; they know they're on
| notice.
| mrtksn wrote:
| M2 has a media engine, which was previously reserved for the
| higher end versions.
|
| Considering that M1 was already an overkill for the most
| tasks, I think it is a meaningful "tok" upgrade.
|
| Besides, I kind of expect the trend of ASIC to continue.
| Instead of having more extreme and extreme lithography, it
| kind of feels more appropriate to have computation specific
| developments.
| GeekyBear wrote:
| AMD recently teased a ~15% single threaded performance
| increase for Zen4 when they will move from TSMC 7nm to TSMC
| 5nm.
|
| Apple just teased ~18% CPU increase while staying on TSMC
| 5nm.
|
| Sounds like they are doing just fine.
| seritools wrote:
| AMD stated >15%, not ~15%, and this was the worst-case,
| conservative number, as they have clarified.
|
| The increased core frequency alone brings in around that
| number already.
|
| https://overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/amd_calls_its_ze
| n...
| fyzix wrote:
| That 18% is multicore
| drno123 wrote:
| My understanding is that 3nm for Apple is coming in 2023.
|
| https://www.slashgear.com/833760/apples-3nm-processor-is-
| abo...
| Reason077 wrote:
| Coming in 2022 for the iPhone 14 Pro line.
| nojito wrote:
| Only because it's a COVID year.
| 7speter wrote:
| My understanding is that AMD coasts behind Apple's process
| progress at tsmc, seeing as Apple invests the bulk of
| resources into tsmc's cutting edge nodes. If apple hits a
| wall, well so does everyone else depending on the fruits of
| their r and d.
|
| Also, if Intel can keep up this time, and if tsmc/apple
| slouches, I wonder if there will be Apple silicon and Intel
| x86-64/risc macs/apppe devices on available simultaneously?
| dmix wrote:
| Apple doesn't really have to worry about competition too much
| for a long time, even if Intel and AMD get comparable
| watt/power levels for laptops, Apple isn't going to be using
| them for their products anytime soon. And people using
| Macbooks aren't likely to switch to Windows/Linux machines,
| even if there is a 20% better CPU.
|
| But really we've only had 2.5 released cycles so far. Not
| much to go by.
| arcticfox wrote:
| I might be a very small minority but I'd personally switch
| back to Linux in an instant if there was something
| comparable to the M series hardware
| markmark wrote:
| I'm considering getting an M2 Air even though I very much
| don't like OSX.
| watmough wrote:
| Asahi Linux is running well enough to be usable for lots
| of things.
|
| However, no screen brightness control, no sound or
| YouTube currently. And there's some page size weirdness
| that means Chrome/Electron (?) is not usable, so no VS
| Code.
|
| If you can live with that, it's so nice having Linux on
| the M1 hardware.
| mshockwave wrote:
| Despite the exciting news and I'll definitely upgrade my
| intel MBP to either M1 or M2 in the future, I doubt my
| personal workflow will change: Linux for development, Mac
| for productivity and maybe some (lightweight)
| development, Windows for gaming and gaming only. While
| Apple probably wants to steal existing user base from
| Windows, on productivity uses maybe, I don't think
| they're planning to drag people from Linux on development
| workloads.
| sliken wrote:
| Asahi linux has most things working, except the
| accelerated GPU. Just in the last week or so a triangle
| was rendered, so progress is has been made.
|
| Sadly while apple has 128 bit wide memory on the low end
| (66-100GB/sec on the mac mini and mba), 256 bit wide
| (200GB/sec), 512 bits wide (400GB/sec), and 1024 bits
| wide (800GB/sec). Nothing wider than 128 bits looks to be
| coming to standard laptops or desktops in the non-apple
| world. I don't really count HEDT chips like the
| threadripper pro, since they are very expensive and very
| limited, and burn many 100s of watts.
| criddell wrote:
| Asahi Linux is, for me, the most interesting thing going
| on in Linux these days.
| dmix wrote:
| What package manager/distro will Asahi Linux be
| using/basing off of?
| sliken wrote:
| Agreed. I'd likely have a studio today if the GPU port
| worked, but unless it comes out RSN I'd likely wait for
| the M2 based studio to come out. The chip has other magic
| inside as well. I'm hoping Linux continues to implement
| support for the MatMul instruction (not just vector
| multiplies), 16 trillion op neural engine, various
| encode/decode video accelerators, etc. I've heard vague
| references to compressed swap to help make the most of
| limited ram (m1 limit was 16GB).
| [deleted]
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| > It's very interesting to think the processor releases were
| holding back the Mac for so long.
|
| Apple also made a huge leap forward with their cooling designs.
| Making the laptop thicker and investing in proper cooling
| design made a huge difference.
|
| My M1 laptop is significantly quieter than my old Intel laptop
| at the same power consumption level. It's not even close.
|
| Apple's last generation chassis and cooling solution were
| relatively terrible, which makes the new M1 feel even more
| impressive by comparison.
| edgefield wrote:
| 100% agree. The last generation of MacBook pros with intel
| processors were virtually unusable for zoom calls or any
| intensive processing power tasks.
| ineedasername wrote:
| Zoom kills the battery on my (non Mac) laptop as well, why
| the heck does a simple video conference app have this kind
| of power draw?
| duped wrote:
| Software video code/decode is extremely expensive.
|
| It's actually a serious issue for sales these days, we
| have a compute expensive product that can't be demo'd
| effectively over zoom.
| furyg3 wrote:
| This is downvoted, but my intel MacBook Pro (maxed out
| specs) from 2015 really was dying on zoom / MS teams calls.
| Probably says a lot about those two apps, but this was one
| of the main reasons I upgraded to an M1 Mac during corona.
| bartread wrote:
| Same, and same spec machine (2015 15" maxxed out
| everything).
|
| I did manage to make it handle Zoom just fine by opening
| it up and blowing it out with an air duster, which I've
| been doing about every 6 months since 2018 or so. The
| interior is a magnet for dust in a way that my Dell work
| laptop just isn't (even though that thing is a PoS in
| many other ways, most of which I suspect are down to
| Windows rather than the hardware).
|
| After a periodic dusting it runs a whole lot better - no
| lag or dropped frames - even when the fans come on. It's
| still a nightmare for fan noise compared with my 2011 17"
| MBP (again, maxxed retail specs, but then replaced
| internal drive with SSD - which made it a new machine -
| and upgraded to 16GB RAM because you can replace at least
| some stuff in machines of this vintage), which then
| unfortunately died due to the GPU desoldering issue (I've
| already "fixed" it once by reflowing the solder, but this
| only held for a couple of weeks before it died again).
|
| I think I'm going to wait for M2 MBPs and then splurge -
| hopefully get 7 years out of the new machine as well.
| drcongo wrote:
| I'd forgotten, because I've had an M1 Pro for a while
| now, but Slack video calls on my last gen, maxed out
| Intel MBP could heat the thing enough to burn through to
| the earth's core.
| theodric wrote:
| Yeah, same, that's why I resorted to water-cooling :)
| https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/so-i-water-cooled-
| my-ma...
|
| It's pretty much silent now, even with the CPU governor
| pegged to max.
| bartread wrote:
| Thank you! I've been looking for a water-cooled laptop
| solution. I've tried the fan based laptop coolers and
| they're basically a waste of time (plus they add to fan
| noise). This is what I wanted. Nobody sells it, but I
| don't mind a bit of fabbing.
| soperj wrote:
| This is really funny considering how high people were about
| their MacBook pros during this era.
| darkteflon wrote:
| Funny, I remember we all complained about this issue
| ceaselessly.
| soperj wrote:
| I remember hearing people complain about their keyboards,
| not that they couldn't video conference.
| sliken wrote:
| I got a late model MBP 16" i9. Zoom, Teams video confs,
| backups, and anything else even mildly intensive and it
| would ramp up to impressively loud levels, enough for
| people in the next room to ask what the noise was.
| nevi-me wrote:
| I had a laptop that did that (got people noticing), I
| went to IT a few times to tell them that something was
| wrong with my laptop, as colleagues' were a bit quieter.
|
| I wish that I'd have been more firm with getting a
| replacement. I now have tinnitus after a year of a really
| loud laptop. I'm in my early 30s. I can't even tolerate
| my desktop with relatively quiet fans.
|
| One day in the office, I shutdown my laptop for the day
| after the air conditioners turned off at 5pm. There were
| about 6 people left in the room, everyone noticed that
| "something had just turned off".
|
| Be careful that your laptop doesn't damage your hearing.
| pudebe wrote:
| You more probably became your tinitus because of being
| stressed that your laptop was so loud. No way it could
| physically harm your hearing ..
| emkoemko wrote:
| come on now... damage your ear from a laptop fan? can't
| even damage your ear from the crap speakers laptops come
| with let alone a fan...
| sydd wrote:
| hmm while I do believe that your laptop is pretty loud, I
| seriusly doubt that it could damage your hearing. Ear
| damage occurs over 90-100 decibels, this is akin to
| leaning close to a loud vacuum and magnitudes greater
| than any laptop.
| NonNefarious wrote:
| skavi wrote:
| Apple reused the exact same Intel chassis for their previous
| generation M1 MacBook Air and Pro 13".
| CodeBeater wrote:
| Sans the "contactless" cooling I'm assuming?
| skavi wrote:
| Sans the fan actually [0]. Yes, the cooling system got
| worse for the M1 Air.
|
| The new slightly thicker Pros are great, but their
| chassis' are not a significant factor in how they perform
| relative to the old Intel models.
|
| The new M2 Air is the thinnest an Air has ever been. I
| bet it will perform excellently as well.
|
| [0]: https://www.ifixit.com/News/46884/m1-macbook-
| teardowns-somet...
| marricks wrote:
| Yes and no? My m1 MacBook Air doesn't have a fan and performs
| better than my Intel MBP in many respects.
| xyst wrote:
| Let's hope they fixed the 32MB TLB bottleneck
| [deleted]
| lvl102 wrote:
| This makes me think Microsoft should just pay up and buy Intel
| because it will be hard to compete with Macs in a year or so.
| seabriez wrote:
| Compete with what? Virtual Memory swapping that Apple just
| introduced?
| dotopotoro wrote:
| How much of microsoft is windows business?
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| I'd still buy the 14" Pro for the more ports, slower chip for
| more $ or not.
|
| And real function keys instead of a touchbar?
|
| They seem to be making weirdly inconsistent choices in the
| product line.
|
| I thought they were going to be getting rid of the touchbar (and
| maybe adding more ports?) and they were only still in the legacy
| 13" because it was legacy. But apparently they mean to
| indefinitely have a 13" Pro with a touchbar and a 14" Pro
| (actually the same size device, just less bezel, I think?) with
| function keys?
|
| And the new M2 Air has a magsafe power connector (like the M1 14"
| and 16" Pro)... but the new M2 13" Pro does not? Why?
| thebean11 wrote:
| Is the M2 faster than the M1 Pro/Max? They didn't do a direct
| comparison, but it's only 20% better than the original M1. I
| bet the pro/max still perform better.
| icyfox wrote:
| I can't figure this one out either. The Air now has the same
| screen as the MBP 13", same processor, slimmer form factor. The
| air is also $100 cheaper than the MBP so that's not a
| justification. The only thing that is different on the specs
| page is the GPU count 10-cores versus 8. Why keep the 13?
| mcintyre1994 wrote:
| I'm guessing they can get slightly better sustained
| performance out of the 13" Pro than the Air because it has a
| fan? But still doesn't really seem to explain it. Unless they
| want to bring the Touchbar back to the other pros.. which
| hopefully isn't the case.
| mmmmmbop wrote:
| I feel like it's a business-driven decision to sell the 13"
| Pro. They can get rid of their Touchbar inventory, and I
| assume the margins on that one are ridiculously high, since
| it's a design that's been unchanged since 2016. Kind of
| like the iPhone SE that is repurposing the 2017 iPhone 8.
| thatswrong0 wrote:
| Yeah the touchbar needs to stay dead.. hopefully this isn't
| it rising from the dead.
| adolph wrote:
| The Air can also be upgraded to the same proc spec as MBP.
|
| Its interesting that they don't have the same screen. The Air
| is .3in larger and supports more colors?
|
| Air 13.6-inch (diagonal) LED-backlit display with IPS
| technology; 2560-by-1664 native resolution at 224 pixels per
| inch with support for 1 billion colors
|
| MBP 13.3-inch (diagonal) LED-backlit display with IPS
| technology; 2560-by-1600 native resolution at 227 pixels per
| inch with support for millions of colors
|
| https://www.apple.com/macbook-air-m2/specs/
|
| https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-13/specs/
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| An... extra 4 pixels in height resolution?
|
| Like... they just found a manufacturer that already made
| these screens and didn't want to retool for Apple's order,
| or what? Why extra 4 pixels?
| adolph wrote:
| My guess is just different displays selected for products
| at different stages in their hardware lifecycle. The MBP
| shares a case dating to before M-series processors. The
| M2 Air is new hardware.
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| Actually, I just realized the new Air has a magsafe power
| connector and two additional USB-Cs, and does not have a
| touchbar.
|
| I was about to buy a 14" M1 Pro, _not_ because I needed the
| speed at all, but I wanted magsafe, I didn 't want a touchbar,
| and two USB-C ports (inclusive of power supply) is not enough.
| Also the built in HDMI out was nice.
|
| The new Air has everything I want except the HDMI. Separate
| magsafe power PLUS two more usb ports (that's enough for me),
| no touchbar... yeah, I'll be waiting for this and saving
| significant money over the 14" M1 Pro I was about to get.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| > The new Air has everything I want except the HDMI
|
| I use a USB-C -> HDMI cable. Works great on my Dell.
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| What product do you have, just so I have an example?
| culopatin wrote:
| Keep in mind that the air with the ram and storage of the 14
| gets pretty close in price.
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| I guess, depending on what you mean by "pretty close".
|
| M2 MacBook Air 13" with 8-core GPU (10-core would be $80
| more)
|
| * 16GB RAM, 512GB storage: $1599
|
| * 16GB RAM, 1TB storage: $1799
|
| M1 14" MacBook Pro with 14-core GPU
|
| * 16GB RAM, 512GB storage: $1999
|
| * 16GB RAM, 1TB storage: $2199
|
| So $400 cheaper, ~20%
| culopatin wrote:
| Ah i guess I was thinking of the education pricing on the
| 14 or the discounts I see all the time, but those would
| also affect the air
| vimy wrote:
| The 13" feels like a stopgap product. Maybe they had supply
| chain problems and they couldn't redesign it so they just put
| an M2 in it.
| skohan wrote:
| It could be the case they want to keep at least one machine
| with touchbar on the market for some poor souls who have
| invested in it.
|
| Same logic for how they keep the iPhone SE with a physical
| home button.
| [deleted]
| babypuncher wrote:
| I don't think M2 is meant as an upgrade over last year's M1 X
| or Pro.
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| What is the 13" M2 Pro meant for, do you think? Why would you
| buy it instead of either the new M2 13" Air or the 14" M1
| Pro? I can't find a reason.
|
| I guess if you really love the touchbar, this is the only
| thing that has it? (That HN hates and we all thought they
| were getting rid of based on the M1 Pro's). Or you really
| hate magsafe power connectors, this is the only new laptop
| that _lacks_ it?
| babypuncher wrote:
| It is meant to fill the gap in the product line between the
| Air and the 14" Pro. The fact that it did not get
| redesigned alongside the Air makes it a weird and confusing
| product. Performance-wise, it should beat out the Air
| thanks to the inclusion of a better cooling system. Just
| like with the M1 versions of the 13" and MBA.
| akrymski wrote:
| Someone please explain to me why I need so much power. Can't even
| run ML on these. More browser tabs?
|
| I miss my 100Mhz IBM PC with 16 MBs of RAM & Visual Studio.
| latenightcoding wrote:
| Video/Photo editing
| akrymski wrote:
| I don't recall owning a computer that was too slow to run
| Photoshop.
|
| 4k video editing - I admit is a valid use case, not something
| I've ever had to do. But I doubt most people buying these are
| video editors.
| seabriez wrote:
| $1500 to edit photos 20% faster? Was it slow before?
| kyleplum wrote:
| I can't help but wonder what Microsoft's answer to Apple Silicon
| will be going forward. They don't really make hardware, but
| selling Windows laptops gets harder and harder the further Apple
| gets ahead. It seems inevitable that there needs to be some ARM-
| based Windows laptops to compete in perf/watt to the M1/M2 but I
| don't know what company can provide an ARM chip that competes
| with Apple at this point.
| guelo wrote:
| I'm not convinced that Apple's advantage is due to ARM vs x86.
| I think it has more to do with Apple's exclusive rights to
| TSMC's most advanced proccess. After all Apple is also beating
| Qualcomm's ARM Android CPUs.
| seabriez wrote:
| Yeah, thats a good point. There's def something shady and
| untold about this whole thing; and that could explain it.
| Apple has deep pockets and considering they have done shady
| deals (like the Google default search engine) this could be
| another one of those.
| andoriyu wrote:
| lynguist wrote:
| The ISA does not matter in a CPU design.
|
| But the process node is also not the main reason.
|
| What matters is only microarchitecture. And Apple has by far
| the most performant microarchitecture design of all CPUs.
| runevault wrote:
| Quick Google search indicates Windows still holds a 74% market
| share. Apple has a long way to go before they are really
| crunching on Windows in the general market. Hardware
| superiority does not guarantee success, for many people what
| they are already comfortable with is fine.
| robocat wrote:
| > Windows still holds a 74% market share
|
| Note that is for desktop PCs: many people don't own a
| PC/laptop so the market share is far far lower than that,
| especially outside of rich countries. Microsoft is now
| primarily just business software?
| pier25 wrote:
| According to StatCounter, macOS only has 15% of the global
| desktop market share.
|
| https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/desktop/worldwide
| freediver wrote:
| I assume what you refer to is this
|
| https://www.statista.com/statistics/218089/global-market-
| sha...
|
| If you look at the trend, macOS is gaining worldwide market
| share while Windows is steadily dropping.
|
| And macOS share in USA has already reached close to 25%.
| Macha wrote:
| Right, but for Apple to gain share in the rest of world
| like they have in the US, they need to drop prices, and
| that'd hurt their margins, including in the US if enough
| people buy cheaper foreign macs (which is definitely a
| thing, in my western european country there's a couple of
| somewhat popular retailers selling imported US laptops
| which are cheaper than local SKUs)
| momenti wrote:
| It's behind a paywall for me.
| jcstauffer wrote:
| Windows may still dominate, but 75% is far below the 90% it
| was 10 years ago, while MacOS has nearly doubled in the same
| timeframe.
|
| As someone who can remember this never changing, that's a
| pretty steep slope...
| runevault wrote:
| Oh it is far from nothing to be certain. And as Netflix's
| recent loss of subscribers and subsequent drop in stock
| price showed nothing is forever. But I'd still need to see
| the drop continue for a bit longer before I full on expect
| Microsoft to be in trouble.
|
| Mind you, I would like to see them follow in Apple's
| footsteps on the train the M1 is creating. It certainly
| makes it FEEL like there is more runway down this path then
| Intel's, with caveats for potential hardware
| vulnerabilities like specter that simply haven't been found
| yet on Apple silicon to inhibit optimizations.
| Macha wrote:
| I think at this point Windows market share could go to 0,
| and while it'd hurt, with Office 365, Azure, Xbox, etc.,
| I think microsoft is sufficiently diversified to survive
| that.
| cbhl wrote:
| Microsoft has ported Windows and Office to ARM for a decade,
| and they have both x86-to-arm (Windows 10) and x64-to-arm
| (Windows 11) translation technologies. They also have ARM-based
| Surface devices in the Microsoft Store (looks like the Surface
| Pro X is the current model).
|
| That said, the big business is still big business: Azure
| (Cloud), Office, and device management (MDM) / active directory
| are big focuses even in a heterogeneous computing environment
| that includes Chromebooks and Macs.
| [deleted]
| vegai_ wrote:
| The only reason to buy a Windows laptop is so you can install
| Linux on it. If Asahi gets there, the last reason will vanish.
| lynguist wrote:
| What is even a Windows laptop? A laptop for which Windows has
| drivers? You buy a laptop for which Windows has drivers in
| order to install Linux? That doesn't make sense.
|
| What you mean to say is: you buy a laptop for which Linux has
| drivers for. Windows is not in this equation, my friend.
| bee_rider wrote:
| I am pretty happy in Intel+Linux. My device basically lasts
| all day. It does get kind of hot if I'm running some crunchy
| numerical code, but that's usually pretty short (assuming the
| thing I'm running is a laptop appropriate toy problem).
| Matl wrote:
| > selling Windows laptops gets harder and harder the further
| Apple gets ahead
|
| That's Apple's marketing but the 12th Gen P chips are perfectly
| capable of keeping up with Apple on the performance side and
| AMD's likely to be able to compete on the power consumption
| side as well. Yes, x86 is likely to never match ARM on battery
| life, but I believe they can be reasonably close for it not to
| be an issue.
| ceeplusplus wrote:
| That's exactly the problem though. One OEM can match Apple in
| performance, and the other in power, but none in both power
| and performance.
| pishpash wrote:
| You forgot about price. There is a lot of low-end work that
| doesn't even need an Air, for $500.
| sliken wrote:
| The competition is improving:
|
| https://www.hardwaretimes.com/amds-
| ryzen-7-6800u-is-35-more-...
| Matl wrote:
| My point was AMD's Ryzen 7000 is likely to be able to do
| both really soon, while Intel's 12th gen can match/even
| exceed it performance wise now.
| procinct wrote:
| It would be nice if they could get close in terms of battery.
| Every windows laptop I've ever had including my current one I
| use for work has had a battery life of around 3 or 4 hours.
| Compared to my MacBook Air which can easily seem to go over
| 24.
| pc86 wrote:
| I have an older work laptop but a nearly brand new
| (comparatively) battery that's about a year, maybe 18
| months old. If I'm actually using my laptop, it will last
| maybe an hour or two. I might get it to last 3-4 if I just
| have email up with the screen dimmed.
|
| Not sure if it's Windows, too much work surveillance-ware,
| or just HP being garbage, but my M1 Mac will last twice as
| long as I've ever needed it to without getting plugged in.
| Even my older Intel MBP lasts most of the day.
| Matl wrote:
| I am honestly a bit shocked at the low numbers you and
| parent are reporting. I have not used Windows in a long
| time but Linux is generally assumed to be less power
| efficient on laptops and yet I have no problem getting
| 7-9 hours out of my year old ZenBook 13 OLED.
|
| That's still nowhere near what you get on a MacBook Air
| but perfectly usable imo.
| vorpalhex wrote:
| Simply getting functional Windows on ARM would be helpful. The
| last surface ARM attempt went poorly.
| aseipp wrote:
| Windows on ARM is basically completely different at this
| point, it's perfectly functional; they have x64 emulation as
| of recently and it just uses normal UEFI for booting, just
| like most other normal laptops. Honestly the emulation is
| pretty good even if it's not as fast as Rosetta2, and they
| even now have a new 64-bit Windows ABI and calling convention
| that allows developers to incrementally port their
| applications to AArch64 on an individual DLL-by-DLL basis (so
| the emulator can handle transitioning between an x64 app and
| an AArch64 DLL, or the other way around.) They aren't just
| doing nothing.
|
| The biggest problem is the hardware: you're basically just
| buying a poorly performing laptop with probably lagging Linux
| support if you get tired of Windows, and you could just buy
| an M1 Macbook and get superior performance and battery life
| for the same cost, and you can even just run Windows _on
| that_ using Parallels and still get good performance. The
| AArch64 laptop market is mostly just Qualcomm processors and
| Apple, and if you actually care about the performance
| profile, there 's basically no comparison between the two
| right now with current offerings; the Mac is the winner, and
| you can even run Linux on it.
| MikusR wrote:
| It's not as fast as Rosetta2 because M1 is about 2-3 times
| faster than the Qualcomm Microsoft is using
| vorpalhex wrote:
| None of the major manufacturers are going to ship Linux to
| consumers. Having a version of Windows that actually has
| apps that they can ship means now building the hardware is
| worth it.
| zerkten wrote:
| Do you mean the Surface X?
| kyleplum wrote:
| I have faith in MS software development - I believe they can
| get windows on ARM working - but as far as I can tell, all
| non-Apple ARM hardware implementations are significantly
| lacking in the laptop space. There are vendors making decent
| phone chips, but I've seen no indication of the ability to
| scale up to a laptop in the way Apple Silicon has.
| macintux wrote:
| Apple's key advantage here, though, is one Microsoft would
| never voluntarily embrace: abandoning x86-64 in favor of
| ARM.
|
| Apple is willing to force its partners and customers to
| make the switch or get left behind. Microsoft would never
| do that, so Windows on ARM will presumably languish in
| application support indefinitely.
| Shadonototra wrote:
| x86 is dead, full of security issues and is energy-
| intensive
|
| smartphones, even embedded devices, including cars
| nowadays are all on ARM, servers are building momentum
| too, not because it is shiny, but because of tangible
| gains on many aspects
|
| > Apple is willing to force its partners and customers to
| make the switch or get left behind.
|
| That's not true at all, the chip doesn't matter when you
| sell software, hardware and services
|
| It's like changing the internals of your Camera to
| provide a better experience and quality, why do you care
| about it? in fact you don't! You want a better Camera,
| company will pick what's best for the better Camera
|
| Apple provide a transparent translation layer to
| accompany the transition with Rosetta, it's effortless
| for the users
|
| That's the problem of Microsoft, they are incapable of
| designing proper UX solution to accompany their customers
| to better solutions, instead they force their customers
| to be stuck with inefficient solution, Microsoft don't
| even care nor dare cleaning their OS to provide up-to-
| date solutions
|
| It's a bloaty mess of 5 generations of different UI/UX
|
| Choosing Windows prevents you from having a seamless
| experience from your Watch -> Phone -> Desktop -> Car
|
| That's what Microsoft fanboy don't understand, they
| protect their poor decision making, their inefficient
| products and ultimately, it leads to the death of their
| products
|
| Microsoft Windows consumers are stuck
|
| That's why Windows Mobile, Metro, UWP, WinUI all flopped,
| the platform is no longer up to date
|
| And it's not just a chip issue, it's the whole ecosystem
| and culture, always too late to make changes, and here,
| incapable of providing a transition path, hence they are
| failing behind apple
| jmclnx wrote:
| > That's not true at all, the chip doesn't matter when
| you sell software, hardware and services
|
| Yes they do, I am typing this in a fully functional 10+
| year old Thinkpad running Linux and getting updates to
| software.
|
| I know people with with Apple Laptops that they can no
| longer get security updates due to the chip change. There
| only option is to install another OS to keep on that
| hardware.
|
| But they chose to pay for a brand new model instead of
| leaving their OS of choice.
|
| So, Apple is able to pull these people along raking in
| the doe because they are willing to send 1500+ USD to
| Apple every few years.
|
| Good for Apple, PT Barnum comes to mind with Apple.
| Shadonototra wrote:
| > I know people with with Apple Laptops that they can no
| longer get security updates due to the chip change. There
| only option is to install another OS to keep on that
| hardware.
|
| Why do you lie? The newly announced macOS supports Intel
| based macs
|
| https://9to5mac.com/2022/06/06/macos-13-ventura-
| supported-ma...
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| _> That's what Microsoft fanboy don't understand_
|
| Maybe if you stop accusing people of being fanboys,
| discussions could be more productive.
|
| In fact, your entire post is all trolling, FUD, and no
| substance or arguments.
| ShadonototraCD wrote:
| paulmd wrote:
| > x86 is dead, full of security issues
|
| to be clear though: spectre/meltdown are not an x86
| issue. POWER, SPARC, and indeed even ARM (although only
| some of their products have OoO/speculation) were
| affected as well. There is no magic to ARM that magically
| makes it secure if you don't protect against side-
| effecting.
|
| I generally agree with the rest of your points, Microsoft
| is stuck in legacy hell with x86 and they are stuck with
| a customer base that specifically values that (everyone
| else has departed for linux or osx, they have "dead sea
| effect"ed themselves into a high-maintenance customer
| base), and they've done a super shitty job in general
| with 5 different generations of UX lava-layered over the
| top, and x86 is clearly falling behind in energy
| efficiency. But security isn't something intrinsic to ARM
| or x86, you can design a secure x86 processor and you can
| design an insecure ARM processor.
| jcranmer wrote:
| > to be clear though: spectre/meltdown are not an x86
| issue. POWER, SPARC, and indeed even ARM (although only
| some of their products have OoO/speculation) were
| affected as well. There is no magic to ARM that magically
| makes it secure if you don't protect against side-
| effecting.
|
| IIRC, M1 was even vulnerable to some of the otherwise
| Intel-only Meltdown (cross-privilege boundaries)
| exploits, let alone the more-or-less ubiquitous Spectre
| (only within same-privilege boundaries) exploits.
| paulmd wrote:
| Meltdown wasn't Intel-only - POWER and ARM A75 were
| affected as well. Meltdown affected _everyone except AMD_
| (who have had a similar issue surface themselves recently
| with their implementation of the PREFETCH instruction)
| and SPARC.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meltdown_(security_vulnerab
| ili...
|
| You're not in the minority for thinking this, there was
| some serious journalistic miscarriage there. To a lot of
| people, Intel and AMD are the whole world and if it
| doesn't affect AMD then it's Intel-only. Even people in
| tech journalism.
|
| (thought I remember Oracle eventually admitting SPARC was
| vulnerable as well but I can't find it so maybe not)
| jcranmer wrote:
| > You're not in the minority for thinking this, there was
| some serious journalistic miscarriage there. To a lot of
| people, Intel and AMD are the whole world and if it
| doesn't affect AMD then it's Intel-only. Even people in
| journalism.
|
| As I recall, the initial investigation focused on Intel,
| AMD, and some ARM implementations, so that was what was
| reported; I personally didn't attempt to follow up on any
| subsequent investigations on other architectures, so I
| was unaware of any specific results on SPARC et al, good
| or bad.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Yes Apple is walking on familiar ground here. They
| abandoned M68K, then PPC, now Intel. They know they can
| do it, as they have done it before, and their customers
| will follow along, as they have done before.
| MBCook wrote:
| Yeah, my impression is that the arm windows laptops were
| basically using cell phone chips.
|
| And if you consider that arm cellphone chips are already
| behind Apple cellphone chips (which the M1/2 improved
| on)... not great performance for windows.
| cowtools wrote:
| even if they can get windows on ARM working, they still
| need to get vendors to distribute ARM versions of their
| software. This is another leg up for apple and the humble
| penguin.
| mwcampbell wrote:
| How is this an advantage for desktop Linux? Yes, open-
| source software can simply be recompiled, but desktop
| Linux-based platforms (particularly GNU/Linux) have never
| been great for proprietary app developers, and adding ARM
| to the mix doesn't make this any better.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| i use surface pro x on arm as a daily driver and it's
| excellent (on the beta release train anyway), and i use linux
| and osx too daily.
| speedgoose wrote:
| I use a windows 11 arm vm on my m1 MacBook with parallel and
| the experience is pretty good.
| mwcampbell wrote:
| Did you have to do anything legally dubious to get that
| Windows ARM VM running? I thought that Windows for ARM
| wasn't officially available except on Qualcomm devices.
| speedgoose wrote:
| No, it was extremely easy and I was surprised about it.
| Just install Parallel, select windows 11, wait a bit and
| it's done.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| I just tried out the Surface X. (Arm-based Microsoft tablet
| running Windows.) There was a lot to like about it, but I
| returned it because it wouldn't connect to my printer and
| scanner.
|
| In general, compared to a Macbook:
|
| - It has a touchscreen
|
| - It has a detachable keyboard
|
| - It has a pen input
|
| Microsoft's execution on the device is flawed. (IE, in order to
| use it as a laptop it needs a much more sturdy hinged
| keyboard,) but there's clear differentiators in their lineup.
|
| IMO: Apple's lack of a touchscreen and detachable keyboard (or
| 270 degree fold) really hurts the Macbook lineup. If I could
| get a Macbook that I could also use as a table, or an iPad that
| truly ran OSX, I'd be happy.
| dboreham wrote:
| I also invested in a Surface Pro X (I have macbooks but don't
| like to use them vs Windows), bought at a deep discount on
| Amazon. I persevered with the ARM-related issues and now love
| it. You really need to run the insiders' builds at present in
| order to get decent compatibility (e.g. Android apps and
| 64-bit Intel emulation). I have Docker and the complete stack
| of dev tools for my projects (Scala, Kotlin, Haskell, Rust,
| TS) running in WSL2 with VSCode IDE.
| shadowpho wrote:
| What compiler do you use?
| jklinger410 wrote:
| Microsoft is a company full of bureaucrats who don't care about
| their product. Apple is going to take over the computing world
| here shortly.
| bob1029 wrote:
| Just a few weeks ago I replaced my Surface Laptop 3 with a M1
| MacBook and couldn't agree more regarding hardware. I can't
| speak for any xbox branded stuff, but any MS-branded computer
| I've ever owned has been trash. Microsoft might be terrible
| at this hardware business, but they do have a powerful
| presence in the developer & business community.
|
| I still feel like Microsoft is the strongest software company
| on earth. Consider that not even the confines of this M1
| MacBook prevent me from being able to compile & run my .NET
| apps without modification. Apple's hypothetical hegemony does
| not cross over in the same way.
|
| Until Apple can get me to look at their Xcode offerings and
| think "wow fuck visual studio, GitHub, et. al.", I do not
| think their takeover of the computing world will begin.
| PraetorianGourd wrote:
| Please talk to anyone outside of the start-up/tech world and
| ask them about the technology they use. A majority don't give
| a toss about M1 or M2 or ARM vs. x86 or anything else that
| seems to get so many in the tech world so excited. They care
| about Excel, they care about backwards compatibility, they
| care about centralized management.
|
| Apple _may_ take over the consumer space but this will be
| more due to the shift from desktop/laptop computing to phones
| and tablets than anything with the M* series of processors.
| threeseed wrote:
| Thankfully we don't need to trust in meaningless anecdotes
| about what those in the 'real world' do or don't know.
|
| The facts on the ground are that Apple's Mac sales are
| rapidly growing and in the last quarter half of all Mac
| buyers were new. That clearly indicates that something new
| to the Mac platform is attracting users.
|
| So whether they know specifically about M1 or not they do
| know that the Macs have better characteristics than in
| previous years which M1 is responsible for.
|
| And given that in all Mac marketing the M1 has been heavily
| advertised logically at least some proportion of users _do_
| know about it and _do_ see it as a key differentiator.
| ezsmi wrote:
| I agree that the world basically runs on excel, but given
| that, the world cares about excel's performance. Especially
| as spreadsheets are only getting bigger.
|
| And then there's this: https://support.microsoft.com/en-
| us/office/use-office-for-ma...
| airstrike wrote:
| Office for Mac is a non-starter for power users due to
| the lack of Alt-key accelerators. There are countless
| other missing features, but that alone is enough to never
| make the switch
| reaperducer wrote:
| Interesting that you state there are missing features.
|
| I remember a speech given by one of the leaders of Mac
| development at Microsoft saying that new features are
| tested out on the Mac first, and if they work out,
| they're brought into the Windows version.
|
| Is that no longer the case?
| airstrike wrote:
| The problem is that Alt-key accelerators are encouraged
| by Windows across the entire OS and it has been the case
| since the very first version of Excel (it really predates
| Excel)
|
| I love the approach of testing new features on the Mac
| first, but it isn't sufficient since the Mac version was
| never updated to be 100% parity with the Windows version,
| which means some of the preexisting features would
| forever be missing from the Mac
| The_Colonel wrote:
| I agree about the CPU architecture, people don't give a
| shit.
|
| However, I think MS/Intel will start losing also corporate
| space. With the staffing problems, companies are looking
| for ways to score cheap points, and I'm starting to see
| "free choice of a laptop, including MacBook" as one of the
| benefits even in some big corps.
| [deleted]
| rastignack wrote:
| I'm working for a big bank. They now offer Mac workstations
| to be able to hire the best devs.
|
| I would have never expected a Unix workstation in such a
| corporate setup when I started 15 years ago.
| seabriez wrote:
| It's a gimmick. Best devs dont us MacOS, lol. There's
| probably some cohort of frontend that try to look "cool."
| But any dev doesn't fall for that fluff. FFS, Apple just
| announced memory swapping as a feature on their iPad, a
| feature that's literally been around since 1970s. That's
| laughable and sad, any dev worth their salt would know
| this.
| kyleplum wrote:
| Consumers do care about things like battery life. I imagine
| most consumers would prefer to stick with what they know
| (windows), but as the battery life/performance gap grows,
| people will be more likely to make the switch.
| Beltalowda wrote:
| > Consumers do care about things like battery life.
|
| For laptops, less than you'd think. A huge chunk of
| people buy laptops so they can work on the dinner table
| and then put their computer away easily when it's time
| for the family dinner.
|
| Source: I spent about five years selling laptops to
| people. That was a while ago, but I don't think much
| changed here. If anything, things changed the _other_ way
| (battery life is even less important for laptops than it
| was) since a lot of people also have a smartphone or
| tablet.
|
| And as battery lives get longer, there are diminishing
| returns as well. The difference between 1 hour and 4
| hours is huge. The difference between 4 and 8 hours
| pretty large. After that? Less so.
|
| In my experience noise and heat (or rather, lack thereof)
| are more important, although also not _hugely so_ for a
| lot of people, just more so than battery life.
| brtkdotse wrote:
| Consumers buy EUR400 17" monstrosities with numpads and
| run them plugged in.
| [deleted]
| babypuncher wrote:
| Microsoft cares about their B2B products. While end users
| complain about Windows being a bloated mess, corporations
| still see no better alternative platform for deploying and
| managing a fleet of thousands (or tens of thousands) of
| machines.
| onphonenow wrote:
| No chance unfortunately. Windows 11 has pop up
| "notifications" that are basically ads all over.
| Unnecessarily hard to cleanup / customize in a biz setting.
|
| If we could deploy Apple products in a business environment
| we would in a heartbeat. But Microsoft just is better here
| currently on a lot of fronts - the last time I chased my tail
| here it didn't pay off.
|
| If Apple wants to compete for the business market I think
| they should! We need first class user account management that
| INTEGRATES with other stuff (ie, google email etc etc). Right
| now you can federate from active directory to almost anything
| (SonicWall/VPN for remote users, WiFi for onprem user
| devices, vSphere for VM management etc etc). If you sync to
| google you can then use google one click sign-ons everywhere
| on the web SAAS side.
|
| We then need office running perfectly.
|
| Then we'd probably do our legacy apps on some VMs and chrome
| for SAAS apps.
|
| We also need to be able to run MacOS virtually. We have
| remote users who talk to an on-prem VMs, separates their
| personal and work stuff, we can lock down and monitor the on-
| prem VMs and they can watch netflix with no worries using
| home machine. How does this work with Apple? It's easy with
| Windows.
|
| I think there would be some demand from smaller co's to make
| the switch if there was a solution which allowed what folks
| are looking for -> migration to cloud as offices go virtual
| with controlled "desktops" delivered to users while still
| allowing in office / warehouse / factory deployments.
| Shorel wrote:
| Provide a service similar to Active Directory? Absolutely,
| that's what is needed from Apple, Red Hat, Canonical, etc.
|
| Depend in any way on a Google Account for anything
| critical? That's something I oppose with all my will.
| onphonenow wrote:
| In a business context a google account requirement would
| be fine. Microsoft is basically going there to get folks
| to move AD into the Azure cloud. We're feeling a ton of a
| pressure towards that, and entitlements for Office etc
| are being delivered that way (so you end up with a mini
| AD instance in cloud already).
| coliveira wrote:
| I have worked on big companies that do pretty much all of
| this on Mac. I agree that it might be harder to do than on
| Windows, because there is so much industry know-how on the
| MS side. But there is no real technical barrier for this to
| happen.
| rtlfe wrote:
| > If we could deploy Apple products in a business
| environment we would in a heartbeat.
|
| I'm not gonna pretend to know about how IT works in
| business, but most employees at big tech companies do all
| their work on Macs, so it's certainly possible in some
| cases.
| iostream24 wrote:
| Is Active Directory still LDAP compliant? Embraced and
| extended or compliant?
|
| Open-LDAP should be able to get you most of the way there.
| Stuff like CIFS allows for mountable shares, and roaming
| profiles is easily handled by LDAP login and a mounted
| /home
|
| Oh wait, then you could use actual FOSS systems, Sorry I
| forgot that this was about Apple.. Ok so they can license
| AD, giving M$!a bone in the process
| jiggawatts wrote:
| You realise that something like 99% of all LDAP
| authentications in the world go through Active Directory,
| right?
|
| This is like someone screaming that Linux is a toy
| because it's not really UNIX unlike SCO.
| onphonenow wrote:
| I actually used to do this. Samba on Mac used to be
| great, so you could do a good hybrid setup. And once you
| had Samba working your linux users could jump in more or
| less if they could self support.
|
| I think Samba went to GPLv3 and updates for it on mac
| seemed to stop entirely cold which killed this as the
| easy integration glue. Does anyone remember details? This
| great integration point went away and basically you end
| up tilting at windmills.
| wintermutestwin wrote:
| My cut n' paste pet peeve example of why macOS seems like a
| "toy" and not for serious business use:
|
| The file save dialog box has this unbelievable limit of 38
| viewable characters! I regularly have to deal with 50+
| character naming conventions where the first 38 characters
| are the same among many files. It is a huge hassle of
| cursor navigation that is so unnecessary as I am looking at
| all this unused real estate in the dialog box.
| reaperducer wrote:
| I agree that this particular aspect of the the dialog box
| is bad. But if something as minor as this keeps you off
| an entire platform, it sounds like making excuses.
|
| I save ~50 - ~100 character filenames all the time. I
| even cut, copy, and paste bits of them in that little
| box. It doesn't feel like a big deal to me.
|
| But yeah, it's the little things like this that belie
| Apple's reputation for attention to detail.
| api wrote:
| It's worse than that. They're busy turning off their users
| with dark patterns, terrible UX, ads and spam in the OS, and
| endless amounts of unnecessary telemetry.
| cowtools wrote:
| It's a false dichotomy. You could say the same about either
| company. Those are the inevitable consequences of
| proprietary software and vendor lock-in
|
| (my original comment was some rhetorical question, I edited
| it to be more direct and less passive-agressive)
| chongli wrote:
| No, you can't. There are no dark patterns, ads, or spam
| in macOS. The worst you could say is that it has
| "terrible UX." I would then respond: compared to what?
|
| In my view, the only desktop-grade OS I prefer over the
| modern Mac is MacOS 9. It was much easier to use and
| understand from top to bottom. On the other hand, it
| lacked a lot of features I've come to take for granted
| (pre-emptive multitasking, multithreading, protected
| memory, support for modern hardware, gestures, etc).
|
| I do really miss the spatial Finder though.
| seabriez wrote:
| Please purchase iCloud Subscription to backup this
| comment.
| api wrote:
| Yes Apple does push iCloud a bit but it seems fairly
| simple to opt out and after you do it stops bugging you,
| or at least that has been my experience.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| There are plenty of dark patterns in macOS. For example,
| macOS will trick users into thinking that the apps they
| want to use are either broken or malicious if developers
| didn't pay Apple $100 a year and Notarize apps. macOS has
| increasingly become a platform to sell iCloud
| subscriptions, as well.
| seabriez wrote:
| No "dark" patterns he says. Even after all the
| revelations, iFads just keep mindlessly worship Crapple.
| When in reality:
|
| https://www.scss.tcd.ie/doug.leith/apple_google.pdf
|
| "iOS sends the MAC addresses of nearby devices, e.g.
| other handsets and the home gateway, to Apple together
| with their GPS location. Users have no opt out from this
| and currently there are few, if any, realistic options
| for preventing this data sharing."
|
| Power corrupts and when one company wields too much of
| it, shit will hit the fan.
| malfist wrote:
| I'm not even sure which company they're accusing of
| having those faults.
| eitland wrote:
| Microsoft.
|
| They had some promising years but I always sensed a
| struggle in the wheelhouse.
|
| Now they are back to forcing Edge on people, ads on login
| screen and in the Start menu are their new inventions and
| their store is almost as broken as ever and most
| importantly hard earned trust flew out the window in the
| process.
| cowtools wrote:
| Apple forces safari on users in iOS, has icloud ads and
| integrations built into the OS, and sells devices with
| locked down bootloaders/filesystems that don't let you
| sideload your own programs.
|
| Who is the bigger threat here? The real threat to user
| freedom is the tribalism of picking the "lesser evil"
| when there are workable non-evil solutions like linux.
| eitland wrote:
| It doesn't force Safari. Chrome is absolutely allowed to
| create a browser and track users and monetize them on
| iOS. They just have to use the same rendering engine.
|
| I'm not Apples greatest fan (see my latest comment), but
| there is a _major_ difference between iCloud or OneDrive
| being pre-installed, both which is OK with me, and Candy
| Crush showing up in the start menu on my work laptop or
| some stupid game altering my login screen, again on my
| work laptop.
|
| And yes, I too am a Linux user.
|
| Why choose between various dumb and evil options if nice
| is available? (I know, some people get as mad at font
| problems and alignment on Linux as I get on microlagging
| on Windows and boneheaded CMD-TAB on Mac, but each to
| their own.)
| dt3ft wrote:
| I just had to hack/patch windows 11 in order to bring back
| "never combine taskbar windows" functionality which existed
| in windows 10. I am strongly considering switching over at
| this point. Removal of "never combine" is such a
| productivity kill that it baffles me how this thing rolled
| out at all. Who took over the wheel over at Microsoft and
| who left, that made this major breaking change take place?
| alluro2 wrote:
| Oof - I understand your gripe completely, Win 11 is
| downright perplexing with some of this stuff, but if
| you're someone who wants the "Never combine..." option,
| you'll probably _hate_ MacOS dock, the way window and app
| switching works, lack of any options there, and general
| "We know better than our users" mentality all over the
| place...
| seabriez wrote:
| "Grass is always greener" effect. If you think there
| isn't weird UI shit on MacOS...
| airstrike wrote:
| Thanks for the heads up. I'm never upgrading if I can
| help it...
| [deleted]
| rhinoceraptor wrote:
| Not to mention, up until a few years ago, most PCs did not
| come with TPMs, so they can't run Windows 11. And Windows
| 10 won't get security patches after 2025.
|
| I built my computer in 2017, and it's still very capable of
| running modern games, and in three years it will still be
| perfectly fine. But I won't be able to run Windows 11
| unless I do weird hacks and workarounds, or try to source a
| TPM that works with my motherboard.
| bornfreddy wrote:
| Yes, Apple would have a difficult job displacing MS, but
| it seems that MS is set on helping them. I mean, who
| doesn't want ads on their work computer? /s
| mwcampbell wrote:
| And yet, I and many of my friends will keep using Windows
| because the third-party Windows screen readers are better
| than macOS's VoiceOver in many ways. I have no doubt that
| other users have their own favorite (edit: or essential)
| third-party tools that keep them on Windows.
| pmulard wrote:
| I have to disagree on this. Microsoft has gone out of their
| way to support their legacy software on older systems, and
| it's a huge reason companies in the IT and IoT sector have
| stayed with them all these years.
| babypuncher wrote:
| Supposedly Qualcomm will have an M1-class laptop chip ready at
| the end of 2023.
|
| That timeframe does not inspire much confidence in me, seeing
| as it is three whole years after M1-based products first hit
| store shelves.
| eitland wrote:
| There are plenty of people who don't like Mac.
|
| Me I am a Linux user, had already had a job that "forced" me to
| use Linux back in 2009 (yes, my boss demanded everyone used
| Linux, in 2009 and I absolutely did not complain as it had been
| my choice since 2005).
|
| I came to Mac that year and was very enthusiastic about what I
| had heard was like a polished, commercially supported Linux
| distro.
|
| I left three years later after having spent significant time
| trying to adapt to it.
|
| I was relieved to get back, even to Windows.
|
| Last fall I got a Mac Mini.
|
| Some of the warts are now fixable, but I only use it for things
| I won't have to do in anger or fear or anything like that.
| aseipp wrote:
| The theory some people have is that Qualcomm's acquisition of
| Nuvia last year was their attempt to get their hands on some
| desktop-class CPU cores (Nuvia was originally aiming for the
| server market), and Microsoft has largely partnered with
| Qualcomm on all their previous offerings. So that might be
| their saving grace if they can actually materialize something
| in the next year.
|
| But I agree. Apple is pulling ahead a decent amount here and
| likely will stay in that leading position for a while, like
| they did in the phone space, and that makes all the competitors
| that much less appealing.
| skavi wrote:
| Nuvia by all accounts has an excellent team. IIRC, Qualcomm
| has redirected their efforts to laptop SoCs.
| aseipp wrote:
| Yeah, I have no doubt they can make an excellent core based
| on what I saw; it's just that there's a limited timeline
| before your competitors make their move, and Apple is very
| much moving right now. Hopefully they'll have something
| released within the next ~6-10 months.
| hiitechk wrote:
| I see Microsoft as a SaaS company now, heavy on cloud and
| Azure. Apple is still a products company.
| paxys wrote:
| The question is who is Apple competing with with these new
| chips? Is it other PC/laptop makers (Microsoft, Lenovo, HP,
| Dell etc) or is it solely Apple on Intel? Whether Microsoft
| (and everyone else) needs to react or not depends on whether
| Apple's overall market share in the segment is going up.
| threeseed wrote:
| Their answer is this:
| https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/05/microsoft-will-boost...
|
| They will need to get developers up to speed porting their apps
| to ARM before they are even in a position to re-boot their
| Windows ARM strategy.
|
| But this is a multi-year journey which is likely to give
| Intel/AMD time to produce something more competitive.
| olliej wrote:
| Does windows not have a rosetta equivalent??
| avereveard wrote:
| too bad 2012 was a turmoiled period for microsoft, windows 8
| for phone was a concrete seed for an unified development
| environment with an unified api.
|
| a series of strategic and communication mistakes kinda wasted
| the shot, and when they finally fixed the desktop side of the
| experience was too little too late.
| kyleplum wrote:
| As far as I can tell, the ARM hardware linked is vastly
| inferior to the current M1 hardware, let alone M2.
|
| > But this is a multi-year journey which is likely to give
| Intel/AMD time to produce something more competitive.
|
| And during this time Apple is going to release M2 Pro/Max,
| M3, etc. I just have a hard time seeing how Intel/AMD catchup
| in the laptop space.
| shadowpho wrote:
| It was hard to imagine Intel catching up to AMD pre C2D.
| jamiek88 wrote:
| And AMD to intel pre Ryzen.
|
| It takes a good 5 years of doing everything right though.
| sliken wrote:
| Well fabs used to be hugely important, not only did each
| generation halve in linear size (4x in transistors per
| area), but each shrink was a big win on clock speed and
| power use. This revisions happened often, around 18 months.
|
| These days the shrinks are smaller, i.e. 5nm -> 4nm -> 3nm,
| but each gen lasts longer, and provides very modest
| improvements in power and clock speed. They are also coming
| out in ever slower release cycles.
|
| So now the competition has more time to catch up, and less
| of a disadvantage of they are a process behind. TSMC is
| currently leading, Apple, Nvidia, AMD, and others are
| bidding for the latest/greatest, while Samsung and Intel
| try to close the gap with their fabs.
|
| Apple has an advantage of doing several generations in
| phones/tablets before bringing out the M1. Additionally
| they have an architecture license, so they do custom cores,
| not just what ARM is offering. This allowed them to tune
| their designs, use engineers from various companies they
| acquired to tune their chips, and get rid of the cruft,
| like 32 bit compatibility.
|
| With all that said I expect Apples the perf/watt advantage
| to decrease over time. What does seem somewhat unique is
| they have build in a relatively small, power efficient, and
| inexpensive package (compared to similar functionality)
| 128, 256, 512, and 1024 bit wide memory interfaces. Sure
| you could build a dual socket Epyc with 16 dimms and likely
| burns north of 100s of watts and takes at least 1 rack
| unit, or you could buy a mbp m1 max. To match the M1 ultra
| you'd have to switch to some exotic CPUs that use HBM and
| sold by companies that typically send 3-6 sales people in
| suites before revealing their prices.
| mwcampbell wrote:
| Ooh, I want one of these. I've long wished that Microsoft
| would release its own small-form-factor desktop to compete
| with the Mac mini.
| DougWebb wrote:
| I've been running an Odyssey from Seeed Studio for a while
| now, as an in-house dev server running SQL Server and IIS.
| It's the form factor you want, and it's been flawless (even
| though it's underpowered for what I'm doing with it.)
|
| https://www.seeedstudio.com/catalogsearch/result/?q=win10
| WithinReason wrote:
| I've long wished that Microsoft would port Windows on ARM
| to the Raspberry Pi!
| kube-system wrote:
| Isn't there Windows IoT Core?
|
| https://www.microsoft.com/en-
| us/download/details.aspx?id=533...
| WithinReason wrote:
| Which is different from Windows on ARM
| skohan wrote:
| Why? Windows seems like a terrible option for minimal
| hardware?
| WithinReason wrote:
| Why? Unofficial ports work OK. Besides, imagine how
| efficient Windows on ARM software would be if it was
| developed on a Rpi
| babypuncher wrote:
| Even if that happens, I'm not sure how much appeal an ARM
| version of Windows actually has. Right now, the only things
| keeping me on Windows are Visual Studio and my huge library
| of legacy software ( _ahem_ video games). Microsoft 's x86
| emulation on ARM is downright atrocious. A native ARM version
| of Visual Studio could keep me productive, but I'm not about
| to spend money on a new computer than runs all my favorite
| old games noticeably worse than my current machine.
|
| If I buy an ARM machine any time in the next 5 years, it will
| almost certainly run macOS or Linux, with Windows relegated
| to an x86 box that I use for gaming.
| nick_ wrote:
| I've got my eyes on the ARM64 build of full Visual Studio
| coming in "the next few weeks".
|
| https://visualstudiomagazine.com/articles/2022/05/27/news-
| ro...
|
| I've been using VS 2022 on "Windows 11 for ARM" inside
| Parallels Desktop on my M1 Max MBP, and it's _just barely_
| usable as VS 2022 is 64-bit. JetBrains Rider is pretty good
| on macOS, and "VS 2022 for Mac" is coming along now, but
| full VS would be nice.
| Shorel wrote:
| True, at that point Linux becomes very competitive.
| skohan wrote:
| How is the Linux on Arm situation currently? I mean
| specifically for desktop Linux?
| sliken wrote:
| Asahi linux has a port for the M1. Accelerated 3d isn't
| supported yet, but recently his a milestone of a working
| rendered triangle.
|
| So not yet, but seems pretty close. Marcan has a Patreon
| if you want to support it.
| lynguist wrote:
| Pretty much every distribution and software package is
| available in ARM64. You will not miss anything.
| kube-system wrote:
| I think the popularity of the Raspberry Pi has sorted out
| most desktop use-cases.
| Macha wrote:
| Microsoft has made three seperate attempts at windows on
| ARM (Windows RT, Windows 10 for ARM, Windows 10 S). Whether
| because each attempt produced a more locked down platform
| than standard windows, or because people prefer
| compatibility with their existing software over battery
| life, or because non-M1 ARM chips were not competitive with
| Intel/AMD even before emulation overhead, none of these
| attempts took off
| lynguist wrote:
| The full Windows 10 runs on ARM64 since 2017. See here for
| all architectures of Windows. [1]
|
| And the deal is that current ARM processors have higher IPC
| than even the latest Intel and AMD processors and are much
| more diverse. The biggest ARM CPUs have 128 cores that have
| higher multi-threaded performance than any CPU by Intel/AMD
| and a Cortex-X2 has higher IPC than any Intel/AMD.
|
| 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Microsoft_Windows_
| vers...
| [deleted]
| sharikous wrote:
| It's not clear if the ISA difference is so meaningful, perhaps
| it's only a small part of the performance boost. Don't forget
| that Apple moved from PPC to x86 to get better perf/watt and
| the PPC ISA is closer to ARM than x86.
|
| Intel or AMD back on their feet can probably match Apple in
| perf/watt. And I guess they are the closest competitors in the
| PC market.
| genewitch wrote:
| i thought apple switched to x86 because two console companies
| were buying most of the PPC fab output? I distinctly remember
| that being the reasoning. Until Ryzen hit with the 3000
| series x86 didn't have a better perf/watt than PPC, at a
| glance.
|
| In the 10 years between my 40 core HP server's release and
| the Ryzen 5950x's 16 cores, performance increased ~10%, but
| the TDP of the 5950x is 10% of the quad xeons in the HP. This
| is ignoring the fact that a single 5950x cost less in any
| market than a single xeon in that HP upon release.
|
| Does anyone else remember the Cavium ThunderX processors?
| Whatever happened to those? the perf/watt on those was
| supposed to be outstanding...
| bee_rider wrote:
| Continue hoping that people who don't want to run MacOS still
| won't want to?
|
| I don't think they have any chance to match Apple in terms of
| efficiency while buying third party chips. The advantage comes
| from controlling the whole stack I think. Apple knows exactly
| what accelerators will be available for each generation, and
| their communication between hardware and software folks is
| presumably much tighter.
|
| Is the Wintel laptop/Macbook gap even that much larger than the
| Android/iPhone gap?
|
| The market for non-Apple devices is, I think, pretty large.
| godelski wrote:
| Why does the Pro have a 720p camera and the Air have a 1080p?
| Seriously, why is Apple still putting in 720p cameras? This has
| to be a mistake, right?
|
| Edit: Also the pro is missing the magsafe charger. Are they
| phasing out the 13" pro?
|
| Pro: https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-13/specs/
|
| Air: https://www.apple.com/macbook-air-m2/specs/
| flakiness wrote:
| MBP13 is an old form factor so it'll be definitely phased out.
| There are 14 and 16 that are getting real love these have 1080p
| webcam IIRC.
|
| But the phase-out period is very long in recent Apple products
| (which is probably a good thing especially for enterprise
| context.)
| darkteflon wrote:
| To clarify, you're talking about the 13" Pro only. But yeah,
| total mystery to me why they're still selling it. It made sense
| in 2020 on the cusp of the Intel/Silicon transition, but now
| that we already have the redesigned 14", don't really
| understand what they're doing here.
|
| Who would buy one of these? The Touch Bar is an evolutionary
| dead-end, and the design of the new 14" and 16" Pros seemed
| specifically targeted at addressing the well-known shortfalls
| of this previous generation.
| michael1999 wrote:
| remember 14" is more like a 13" with a narrower bezel.
| enduser wrote:
| The 14" is a tank compared to the 13"
| DRW_ wrote:
| That Pro is the old design. It's just Apple's usual thing of
| keeping an old design of a product around to serve some kind of
| gap they see in their market - it creates a confusing product
| lineup because this means you have:
|
| New Macbook Air: New design & M2 chip
|
| New Macbook Pro 13": Old design & M2 chip
|
| Macbook Pro 14" & 16": New design & M1 Pro/Max chips
| convery wrote:
| I see a lot of hype around the AI cores. What do regular users
| use it for? Only thing I can think of is accelerating writing
| recognition / face-auth stuff.
| Escapado wrote:
| They were so careful not to compare it to the M1 Pro!
| asdff wrote:
| I was pricing it out, to get 512gb and 16gb of memory its
| $1700. You might as well save $25 a week until september and
| buy the m2 pro that comes stock with more memory and storage
| when they inevitably update the 14 inch and sell it for $2000.
| Better yet, wait 6 months and buy the refurbished m2 pro for
| $1700...
| reaperducer wrote:
| _You might as well save $25 a week until september_
|
| The best tool is the one you have, not the one that doesn't
| exist. In September you could then wait for the M2 MAX coming
| in June. The in June wait for the M3 in September.
|
| I can't imagine telling a client, "I'll get that video to you
| around Christmas. I'm waiting for another version of a
| computer that just came out to come out."
|
| When it's raining, you want an umbrella, not to wait in the
| rain until someone builds a cafe to hide in.
| swyx wrote:
| can anyone knowledgeable please oblige us with a comparison?
| masklinn wrote:
| The CPU cores of the M1 and M1P are exactly the same (just
| with different mixes, and different boosting behaviour on the
| E cores).
|
| If the M2 has 18% higher PPW, and keeps the same TDP / power
| draw, that's 18% higher performances (remains to be seen
| whether it's across the board for E-cores, or for P-cores)
| it's about 25% below the 6+2 M1 Pro, and about 70% below the
| 8+2 M1P. At least looking purely at the CPU.
| paulmd wrote:
| 14" MBP gets the M1 Pro/Max, not the base-tier M1.
|
| The M1 Pro is a 6+2 configuration, so it will have a little
| bit of an edge in core configuration, but Apple claims 18%
| faster on this generation, which might cancel out that edge a
| little bit (I'm guessing slightly slower still, but close).
| The M1 Pro does have a 40% larger GPU, but the M2 is 35%
| faster (again, taking Apple at face value) so it should again
| be similar-ish in gpu performance, very slightly slower
| (135/140 = 96% as fast).
|
| The big difference is still that M1 Pro gets support for much
| larger memory, and the 14" has a much better port
| configuration, the 13" is basically still the same old
| chassis with USB-C and the touch bar, just updated with a
| newer processor.
| stetrain wrote:
| M1 Pro is either 6+2 or 8+2 depending on which model you
| select.
| cehrlich wrote:
| M2 will be faster in single core, M1 Pro will be faster in
| multi core.
|
| Taking Apple's 20% claim at face value:
|
| Geekbench Single Core - M1, M1 Pro: 1700, M2: 2040
|
| Geekbench Multi Core - M1: 7700, M1 Pro 8-core: 9000, M2:
| 9200, M1 Pro 10-core: 12400
|
| Of course we'll see M2 Pro/Max sooner or later, which will
| presumably match M2 on single core just like the previous
| gen.
| joakleaf wrote:
| Apple's 20% was for multi-core.
| skavi wrote:
| The M1 and M2 have the same number of cores. I suppose
| the fabric could have been improved for the M2.
| ohgodplsno wrote:
| >Taking Apple's 20% claim at face value:
|
| Which you shouldn't. They are, once again, using
| performance per watt. Nothing guarantees that it even runs
| at the same wattage.
| jasonlfunk wrote:
| Why would they? This is the base M2.
| ysleepy wrote:
| M2 will outperform the M1 Pro variants on single core perf,
| since it is the same across all M1 chips apart from the
| memory bandwidth.
| skohan wrote:
| It's hard to imagine needing this honestly. I'm typing this
| on an M1 air, and even on this chip it's so snappy and
| quick even on things like larger compilation jobs.
|
| I'm not on the super-power-user end, but imo the
| price/performance for the air, as well as the form factor
| seems to be a sweet spot.
| shepherdjerred wrote:
| Single threaded performance is very useful for gaming,
| but I agree that the M1 is so fast that anything faster
| is just a bonus.
| skohan wrote:
| Which games can you even play on a mac?
| lynguist wrote:
| I myself played Ratchet & Clank 3 on PCSX2 on my Macbook
| Air M1.
| dumpsterdiver wrote:
| There's always MUDs!
| opan wrote:
| Minecraft with shaders and a high-res resource pack.
| emu wrote:
| I enjoyed playing Stellaris on my MacBook M1 pro on a
| transcontinental flight last night. 4x games work well
| for passing the time!
| sydthrowaway wrote:
| How does the M2 compare to Intel's offerings?
| supreme_berry wrote:
| lynguist wrote:
| You get a comparable performance at 15W with M2 to Intel at
| 55W.
|
| Intel is not significantly faster, just more power hungry.
| That's the mean difference in day to day usage.
| dylan604 wrote:
| One is a chip just announced/released by Apple. The other is a
| company floundering and stagnating in their product offerings.
|
| Did you want to compare the M2 to a specific Intel CPU? The M2
| is better.
| zamalek wrote:
| Watt-for-watt, dollar-for-dollar, M1 steamrolls Intel. Intel
| does claim to currently have the most powerful consumer chip on
| the planet, if you watts and performance (effectively cooling
| the thing is a bit of a meme).
|
| Note that Apple do not mention AMD. M1 and M2 probably still
| kick AMD to the dirt on the power efficiency front, but the
| cost for performance end would be difficult to quantify (and
| the AMD performance ceiling is also significantly higher).
| [deleted]
| colinmhayes wrote:
| Intel's chips are a bit faster at the top end but use far more
| energy. Certainly a problem for laptops, but I don't think most
| desktop users care. I guess Intels prices are a bit better if
| you want more than 8gb mem/256 ssg, but they're not that far
| apart.
| josu wrote:
| Apple A4 (2010) vs A5 (2011)
|
| - CPU: 100% faster
|
| - GPU: 600% faster
|
| Apple M1 (2020) vs M2 (2022)
|
| - CPU: 18% faster
|
| - GPU: 35% faster
|
| Diminishing returns.
| kristianp wrote:
| That's the same for all chip makers. It's the end of Moore's
| law that's bringing the diminishing returns, as you probably
| know.
| jb1991 wrote:
| That's what they call cherry-picking stats.
| beckingz wrote:
| "M2 takes the industry-leading performance per watt of M1 even
| further with an 18 percent faster CPU, a 35 percent more powerful
| GPU, and a 40 percent faster Neural Engine"
|
| 18% faster at the same performance per watt is a nice increase.
| Interesting to see if this will ever make it to their desktop
| computers.
| paulmd wrote:
| > 18% faster at the same performance per watt is a nice
| increase.
|
| 18% faster _at the same wattage_ , which means 18% higher
| perf/watt.
| smoldesu wrote:
| GPU wattage seems to be increasing, but that appears to be
| linearly correlated with the number of cores they're adding.
| Still a bit of an "Intel Moment" all things considered, but
| not as bad as it could have been.
| skavi wrote:
| Have they confirmed anything about power?
| kllrnohj wrote:
| Since they never made any specific power claims of the M1,
| why would you expect them to make any such statements about
| the M2? You'll have to wait for 3rd party reviews and
| analysis for that.
| paulmd wrote:
| From the presentation, taken from Anandtech's liveblog:
|
| https://images.anandtech.com/doci/17429/34312453.jpg
|
| Same power budget.
| skavi wrote:
| Ah, completely missed that slide. Thanks!
| ntoskrnl wrote:
| The 18% is for multithreaded workloads. Have they said anything
| about single core perf yet?
| sliken wrote:
| I didn't see anything, but inferring from what I can find
| it's mostly improvements the slow cores (icestorm ->
| blizzard) improvements. The fast cores (firestorm to
| avalanch) seems like a very small difference.
| joakleaf wrote:
| No they didn't reveal single core performance.
|
| It is commonly assumed that M1 shares high performance
| Firestorm cores with A14.
|
| It looks like Geekbench scores for A15 over A14 is about 18%
| in multithreaded, and 10% in single thread.
|
| It is also very likely that the M2 uses the same Avalanche
| cores as in A15. So I would suspect that this translates to a
| 10% increase in single threaded performance between M2 and M1
| as well.
|
| Incidentally, A15 runs at around 3.2 Ghz vs 3 Ghz for A14. So
| the majority of the speed-up between A14 and A15 comes
| directly from increasing clock frequency. M1 runs at 3.2 Ghz.
| clintonwoo wrote:
| Ouch, that MacBook Pro 13" chassis makes me hurt. The air
| actually has a better body, that's disappointing. The display
| size, magsafe and function keys are all better on Air but it
| doesn't have a fan for sustained performance :'(
| skavi wrote:
| As far as I can tell, there is almost no reason for the 13" MBP
| to exist.
| Hamuko wrote:
| Especially with the single external display limitation. It's
| basically just a MacBook Air with fans.
| pishpash wrote:
| Wait till software catches up where the fan needs to turn
| on.
| saagarjha wrote:
| Lots of people like computers that have "pro" in the lame...
| seppel wrote:
| > Ouch, that MacBook Pro 13" chassis makes me hurt.
|
| It is just the previous MacbookPro 13" with the M1 replaced
| with an M2. The Air is better in all regards if I read the spec
| correctly.
| ricardobeat wrote:
| That's what the MBP 14/16 are for. Unless you're editing video
| though, it's unlikely you'll notice a difference.
| dry_soup wrote:
| And the touchbar limps on
| bredren wrote:
| Confounding why this is continuing. Is there that much
| remaining inventory?
| rootsudo wrote:
| The only downside is now magsafe over usb-c :(
|
| unless you can charge with both on new macs?
| clintonwoo wrote:
| You can charge with both on the 14" and 16", at the apple store
| a few weeks ago they told me the next one's will likely have
| the same capabilities.
| rootsudo wrote:
| That's awesome, thought they were doing a 180 and forcing
| magsafe charging only.
| ascendantlogic wrote:
| Why is that a downside? Magsafe was one of the best things
| about the older, early-2010's Macbooks.
| skohan wrote:
| I for one love charging with USB-C. By now I have USB-C
| cables laying around a few different places in the house, and
| can charge almost anything at any one of them. No going to
| the other room to get the cable.
| wildrhythms wrote:
| Magsafe is fine; having to travel with a separate charging
| block is terrible. The USB-C consolidation has been awesome
| for people like me who travel frequently- my phone, external
| battery, M1 Air, headphones, Nintendo Switch... all charge
| over USB-C, so I only have to travel with a single charger.
| It's wonderful
| habryka wrote:
| You can charge with both, in any port (I have a Macbook pro
| with Magsafe, but primarily use all the USB-C chargers I have
| lying around)
| renewiltord wrote:
| 20% better, 20% more cost? Fair enough. I'll get the M1 for my
| mum
| skavi wrote:
| 20% faster. The chassis and display have been changed as well.
| (Not to say you've made the wrong decision)
| renewiltord wrote:
| Not at all, your opinion is much appreciated. Nothing
| massively different in the chassis and display, right?
| skavi wrote:
| Nothing game changing IMO.
|
| They added MagSafe charging.
|
| It's thinner and lighter (the previous model was already
| thin and light).
|
| They added some new colors (I'm partial to the blue).
|
| The screen is a few pixels taller (however a new notch
| takes some of those pixels away).
|
| The camera is higher quality, the speakers are a bit
| better, and the screen gets a bit brighter.
| renewiltord wrote:
| Ah, the camera. That's big for her: 1080p vs 720p. But I
| think she's going to end up using her phone. Still, it
| does make me pause.
|
| The weight and colours are a good point. Thanks for the
| summary! <3
| EgeAytin wrote:
| Despite these improvements, it's not enough to replace M1 Pro
| when considering the price/performance
| jrib wrote:
| only two usb-c ports :(
| nabaraz wrote:
| Looks like a pretty minimal upgrade over M1 pro. apple.com and
| keynote were also super vague with multi display support,
| parallelization etc.
| packetslave wrote:
| Right, but you can't get an M1 Pro in a Macbook Air or 13" MBP.
| I think we'll probably also see an M2-based iPad Pro.
|
| If I had to guess, we'll next see a Macbook Pro 14"/16" with M2
| Pro/Max, and the Mac Pro will be M2 Ultra.
| notum wrote:
| refulgentis wrote:
| 5 years from now people will grok more fundamentally that
| launching 2 process nodes ahead of Intel via TSMC was the big
| win.
|
| For now, we'll deal with marketing-ese about how "other CPU
| vendors have to choose between power and performance" from
| Apple's head of semiconductor engineering, and posts on this
| page like the one saying Microsoft doesn't care and Apple's
| about to take over computing.
| paulmd wrote:
| > 5 years from now people will grok more fundamentally that
| launching 2 process nodes ahead of Intel via TSMC was the big
| win.
|
| AMD will have process node parity with Apple this year - Zen4
| will be on N5P, as will M2. I doubt that alone will be
| sufficient for x86 to catch up, they have a LOT of ground to
| make up.
|
| (this is, of course, the "small" laptop chip for Apple, the
| M2 Pro/Max will add more CPU cores and a much larger GPU, but
| you can still extrapolate the performance trends once we see
| Zen4 and I doubt it's going to be all that flattering. AMD
| has said "minimum of 15% faster", but even if that works out
| to 40% _on average_ , Apple just made their own 18% leap, and
| the current architectural gap is much larger than 22%
| according to SPEC2017 benchmarks.)
|
| It's not all just "apple wants to go bigger" either - Apple's
| cores are quite svelte in terms of transistor count as well,
| they're in between Zen3 and Alder Lake transistor count (this
| is supposition, but I think they would still be slightly
| smaller than Alder Lake even if you removed the AVX-512
| support from Alder Lake). Most of their transistors go
| towards a truly titanic GPU, the cores themselves are fairly
| small (the efficiency cores in particular are _impressively_
| small for the performance they give).
|
| And yes, of course "Apple has chosen to target slightly lower
| clock rates with really high IPC", but that is enabled by
| design decisions that ARMv8 allows (really deep reorder
| buffer, really wide decode) that x86 cannot replicate as
| easily, you can't just triple x86's IPC by targeting a
| slightly lower clockrate and going wider.
|
| And yes, ARM code is slightly less dense - about 12% larger
| than x86 when compiling the SPEC2017 test suite, according to
| the numbers from the RISC-V people. That's not where the
| difference comes from either, it's not just "high IPC on low
| density code".
|
| I know what Jim Keller said, and he's right, x86 isn't _dead_
| , but it's not ahead right now either, even considering Apple
| is on 5nm. When AMD is on 5nm this year, we can re-assess and
| see whether that was the driving factor, or whether there are
| design reasons as well.
|
| People seem to have interpreted Keller's comments as being
| "it is _physically impossible_ for ISA to make any
| perceptible difference in perf-per-transistor or perf-per-
| watt " and I'm not sure that's a statement he would agree
| with. A 10-20% advantage to restructuring your architecture
| in a way that enables deeper reorder and better decoding vs
| x86, seems like a reasonable premise to me. Especially
| considering the baseline is x86, the quintessential legacy
| behemoth ISA. There has been a lot of work to keep it in
| play, but that means a lot of the "easy tricks" like
| instruction cache have already been exploited just to get it
| this far. Surely there are things that could have been done
| better from a clean start.
| smoldesu wrote:
| > When AMD is on 5nm this year, we can re-assess and see
| whether that was the driving factor, or whether there are
| design reasons as well.
|
| Quick note: AMD's 5nm offerings will not be using a
| big.LITTLE configuration, so direct comparison with the M1
| would probably not be very accurate for the purposes of
| comparing power consumption.
| msbarnett wrote:
| > Quick note: AMD's 5nm offerings will not be using a
| big.LITTLE configuration, so direct comparison with the
| M1 would probably not be very accurate for the purposes
| of comparing power consumption.
|
| Ok, but the second we start saying Intel or AMD needs to
| make architectural changes to match M1 performance/power
| consumption, that in and of itself is a refutation of the
| GP's argument that the only reason M1 looks good is the
| manufacturing node. We're admitting that there's an
| architectural component to its results.
| paulmd wrote:
| And Intel has big.LITTLE but they're not using TSMC
| nodes. Apple comparisons run on OSX or Asahi Linux, which
| doesn't run x86, so the software/ecosystem is different.
| Etc etc.
|
| No comparison is ever perfect, you'll just have to take
| the best data we have and run with it. Complaining that a
| study isn't exactly perfect is trite, once you get beyond
| the "junior scientist makes obvious methodological error"
| tier it's honestly one of the least useful forms of
| criticism, someone is always going to think it should
| have been done better/differently (and wants you to take
| the time and spend the money to do it for them). But
| science is about doing the best you have and trying to
| make reasonable extrapolations about the things you
| can't.
|
| Single-thread benchmarks on big vs little cores will get
| you IPC figures, and then you can scale those according
| to clocks you see on full-load conditions, for example.
|
| Or you can simply compare it to a future 13th/14th gen
| Intel i3 with big.LITTLE, or an AMD quad-core APU. AMD
| has SMT, that's an advantage, Apple has single-threaded
| cores but a couple extra little cores, it's similar-ish.
|
| Nothing is ever perfect. You just make do. It doesn't
| mean we throw up our hands and scream that if we can't be
| accurate to 1000 decimal points then we can never truly
| know anything.
|
| (You may not have intended this, so just FYI: it kinda
| comes off like you're pre-stating that you won't accept
| the results if they don't come out the way you like, that
| you'll find some other difference between the two to
| latch onto. And there _will_ always be some minor thing
| you can latch onto, no two designs are exactly identical.
| But that 's not really an honest way to approach science,
| merely being able to theorize some differences isn't
| useful and if you feel strongly about it then you should
| do a similar test yourself to demonstrate.)
| smoldesu wrote:
| I definitely agree that there _are_ reliable tests here
| (your suggested IPC count is "good enough" for these
| purposes), but the majority of benchmarking between these
| two machines wouldn't yield much of a comparison at all.
| I don't think it's unreasonable to annotate that
| comparing these chips directly is fools errand,
| especially since Apple has demonstrated that themselves
| with their own M1 benchmarking/graph fiascos.
| memetomancer wrote:
| Can you maybe explain what you mean here? I can hardly
| understand your point about Intel, and don't seem to get what
| you are implying about "marketing-ese".
|
| The M1 is a spectacular chip. The M2 seems like a fine
| iteration.
| hu3 wrote:
| They mean Apple's advantage is in good part due to their
| anti-competitive practice of buying TSMC's entire 5nm
| production. Leaving none for others like AMD which had to
| compete on 7nm for the longest time. Same will happen for
| 3nm if nothing changes.
|
| Whatever your opinion may be about Apple/AMD/Intel. Unfair
| competition is not good for consumers in the long run.
|
| edit: instantly downvoted. As per tradition in Apple
| related posts on HN when faced with facts.
| geraneum wrote:
| The fact is, Intel is not using TSMC (yet) for their
| high-end CPUs that compete with Apple. Their stagnation
| has nothing to do with Apple monopolizing the fab's
| capacity. Since they [Intel] were on Macs before Apple
| Silicon, they are being used for direct comparisons.
| 988747 wrote:
| What's anti-competitive about that? Apple doesn't even
| make their own chips, they need outside vendor for that.
| AMD and Intel are free to offer TSMC even more money, if
| they want.
| hu3 wrote:
| You think AMD's 200 billion market cap stands a chance
| against Apple's 2.3 trillion market cap?
|
| Consumers only stand to lose in the long run. Including
| Apple consumers.
| 988747 wrote:
| As far as I know TSMC is building a new factory in
| Arizona right now, and one more in Taiwan. That was
| largely financed by Apple's money, and is a huge win for
| consumers who will benefit from the most advanced chip
| manufacturing capabilities for the years to come.
| hu3 wrote:
| > financed by Apple's money
|
| > huge win for consumers
|
| doubt
| yakubin wrote:
| That buying however much of whatever from a single
| company can be read as "anti-competitive" reflects more
| on the market, which relies on a single company for its
| fundamentals, than the buyer.
|
| To me it seems that the problem is not that Apple bought
| however much of whatever from TSMC, but rather that TSMC
| doesn't have competition at the moment. Hopefully that
| changes.
|
| (I do think HN is a bit trigger-happy with downvotes
| lately. I don't often get downvoted, but sometimes people
| who reply to me with a different view do, and so they get
| grayed out and drop in the comments. I used to try to
| counter that, but my one vote doesn't work for very long,
| so I mostly gave up. But it's really annoying.)
| hu3 wrote:
| Agree. Chip production is such an important aspect of
| economy these days. It baffles me that US still couldn't
| come up with a TSMC-like factory yet.
|
| I get that it's really hard. Like rocket-science hard.
| But still.
|
| Maybe Musk can start something in the sector.
| msbarnett wrote:
| They're only 1 process node ahead of Intel. Intel 10nm is
| roughly equivalent transistor density as TSMC 7nm. The M1 was
| TSMC 5nm.
|
| And given that there's no way a single process node jump is
| going to give Intel a 75% uplift in instruction per clock (2
| nodes wouldn't give them that either, for that matter), Intel
| is going to have to clock higher for comparable performance
| and that's still going to put them behind on power
| consumption (which is exponential in clock speed).
|
| Which is to say, it's completely untrue that the only reason
| these chips look good for speed/power-consumption is the
| process node they're on. Apple came up with a super-wide
| architecture (way wider than anything we've ever seen in
| x86-64), and they made it pay off by getting good performance
| out of a much lower maximum clock, which bought them a ton of
| power efficiency.
| refulgentis wrote:
| They were two ahead at launch (to wit, comparisons were
| against 10th gen Intel)
| out_of_protocol wrote:
| Can we switch to MT/mm2? (millions of transistors per
| square millimeter)
| teilo wrote:
| Yeah. The "nm" in a node designation is nothing but
| marketing now, since 3D FET designs have completely changed
| what "nm" means.
| Shadonototra wrote:
| How do you provide fanless laptop, and extended battery life
| if you don't care about maximizing performance while
| maintaining ultra low power usage?
|
| That is why nobody buys windows based laptops anymore and the
| macbook air is the best selling laptop
|
| you don't need apple marketing team to see how people are
| fed-up with hot windows laptops and their noisy fans (and
| blind btw, pun intended or maybe not lol)
| refulgentis wrote:
| I agree, a fanless cool laptop is preferable over a loud
| fan and hot laptop
| Quarrel wrote:
| > That is why nobody buys windows based laptops anymore and
| the macbook air is the best selling laptop
|
| A huge majority buy windows based laptops.
|
| Macbook Air's are the best selling laptop because of the
| fragmentation of the Windows laptop market amongst
| manufacturers. MacOS does not in any way make up a majority
| of laptops.
|
| I get that it is 2001 again and we should all be shitting
| on MS, but let's try and keep some facts in the
| conversation.
| Shadonototra wrote:
| Incapable of attacking my argument about fanless/power
| efficiency, instead you nitpick on the sales
|
| > I get that it is 2001 again and we should all be
| shitting on MS, but let's try and keep some facts in the
| conversation.
|
| That's a windows 11 with snapdragon for you! fanless! ha
| Beltalowda wrote:
| It's not a "nitpick" you made a specific claim.
|
| Not the person you're replying to but I'll reply: I think
| the M1 is really nice, although I don't care much for
| some other MacBook hardware design decisions and I don't
| care much for macOS either, so I didn't buy one, but I
| did spend some time considering it and looking at
| options.
|
| In the meanwhile, my current ThinkPad is "effectively
| fanless, most of the time". What this means is that as
| I'm typing this it doesn't need any fans. It doesn't most
| of the time, even when I'm programming and compile my
| project (incremental compiles) it doesn't need the fans,
| and it remains fairly cool as well. With full compiles or
| some (not even all) games it does need the fans, and
| that's okay with me.
|
| And this laptop is actually 4/5 years old; I got it
| "second-hand new". Newer ones are even better. Oh, and
| the battery also lasts about 15 hours on a full charge,
| which is not as good as a M1 machine, but "more than good
| enough" for me.
|
| So "full fanless" would certainly be nice, but in the
| meanwhile "mostly fanless" is actually just fine.
|
| Also remember that Apple only makes top-of-the-line
| laptops; if you buy a cheap Windows laptop: yeah, you're
| not getting an especially good laptop. But if you buy
| something in the same price range you often (not always)
| get something much more comparable.
| zamalek wrote:
| > fanless laptop
|
| See also: "how do you provide ever thinner laptops?"
|
| The reason you're so sensitive to fans is because Apple's
| attention to cooling goes far, far, beyond a joke. Modern
| processors will throttle at their maximum temperature
| (typically 100C for CPUs). Apple's approach has always been
| to depend on that as a cooling solution. People have
| improved the cooling on the M1 to something in the ballpark
| of the M1 Pro, and performance lifts to match.
|
| M1 has certainly thrown the whole compute-per-TDP equation
| into chaos, and you'll definitely see more performance
| prior to hitting tj-max, but when that comes, performance
| will come crashing down. They don't have fanless cooling,
| they _essentially_ have no cooling.
|
| If your workloads don't require extended periods of
| compute, then the fanless Apples can't be beat. Claiming
| that the M1 beats x86 laptops across the board is, well,
| "very uninformed " to say it kindly. To say it frankly,
| fans of high-end devices (whether Windows or Linux) do get
| very noisy in the face of uninformed bullshit.
| paulmd wrote:
| > If your workloads don't require extended periods of
| compute, then the fanless Apples can't be beat. Claiming
| that the M1 beats x86 laptops across the board is, well,
| "very uninformed " to say it kindly.
|
| OK, but Apple also makes the MBP line with active cooling
| too?
| zamalek wrote:
| Sure, but the parent comment was going on about fans.
|
| Edit: you also get insanely specced x86 laptops that have
| no business being laptops, so for the few who actually
| buy those monsters the parent comment is also laughable.
| ShadonototraCD wrote:
| burmanm wrote:
| Living in a bubble is always nice though. How many laptops
| are even used as laptops?
|
| Most of the world is not using Apple laptops and is not
| going to. The Facebook community around you might, but
| that's not the entire world. The "nobody" in your list
| still accounts for what, 90% of the laptop buyers? Even
| more?
|
| Most of the powerful laptops are neither Macs, as those go
| to the gaming laptops where - this is a big surprise -
| games and their performance counts. Apple has no answer
| there.
| Shadonototra wrote:
| > Most of the powerful laptops are neither Macs, as those
| go to the gaming laptops where - this is a big surprise -
| games and their performance counts. Apple has no answer
| there.
|
| Games? the biggest market is the Mobile market, Desktop
| market is shrinking year after year, it'll become a niche
| very soon
|
| Ever heard of Genshin Impact?
| https://gamerant.com/genshin-impact-made-more-money-in-
| its-f...
|
| And please learn to project a little when you do some
| analysis, yesterday is long gone, tomorrow is what's
| going on
|
| And when say nobody, i talk about the people making a
| deliberate choice, in that group, rarer are the people
| choosing a windows laptop, other than the people
| replacing their IT fleets, or your granny picking a cheap
| laptop because she has no clue what an OS is anyways and
| everything is pre-installed with Windows, for some
| reasons ;)
| zamalek wrote:
| > Games?
|
| Yes, games. Even as a floundering mess, Blizzard rakes in
| 300-400mm/quarter on a single game that is a PC
| exclusive, without insane microtransactions/loot boxes.
| ShadonototraCD wrote:
| burmanm wrote:
| Games, yes, games. We're talking about laptops here, not
| mobile phones. PC gaming industry is huge and continues
| to be (even in the future iterations you talk about).
|
| When it comes to projections, the ~1300EUR laptops are
| not going to be the ones taking over the world. Not in
| any realistic projection, unless the inflation goes to
| Turkey level.
|
| Every people makes deliberate choice, don't discount
| someone's choice not being deliberate just because it
| does not align to yours. I don't pick a laptop for my own
| self, but a desktop - since I don't need the mobility
| when I need grunt. There M2 brings me nothing so far.
|
| Your granny might make a more thoughtful choice than you
| do. She might buy a tool for herself while you're
| fancying over something shiny. That's not deliberate.
| ShadonototraCD wrote:
| HideousKojima wrote:
| The highest estimates I've seen for Mac laptop market share
| are 15%, most places put it at 6-8%.
| dzonga wrote:
| I like how Apple is pushing forward the computing industry to
| have SOC's. However, in as much how fast an m1, m2 or the Alder
| lake processors are. the problem, lies in 45% in the HN
| demographic that's shipping dog slow software. whether creating
| OS code at Microsoft, Linux or Chrome. then the rest of the web
| dev's. Hopefully the industry can transition to SOC's with
| documented API's so we can skip the multi-layers of software i.e
| Firmware -> OS -> Driver's -> User Land Software to Just Hardware
| -> Thin OS (unikernel like) -> User land software
| iostream24 wrote:
| Wake me up when other hardware makers catch up so I can finally
| care, as I won't be purchasing another Apple brand product,
| thanks.
| hit8run wrote:
| Where is the new Mac Pro? Where is the upgrade to the XDR
| Display? Where is the M2 Mac Mini? What a shit show.
| TillE wrote:
| For a very long time, the M2 has been expected to launch before
| an updated Mac Pro - which might still be using an M1 variant,
| and should be out by the end of the year.
| perardi wrote:
| Good faith answer?
|
| Supply chains. Good ol' supply chains.
|
| The "Mac" is really the "MacBook"--very solid majority of
| devices sold are laptops, followed by iMacs, then minis, then a
| teeeeeny sliver of Mac Pros.
|
| Well, probably. People infer it from quarterly earnings. Apple
| no longer breaks it down explicitly by category. But it's a
| very safe assumption the biggest selling Macs, _by far_ , are
| laptops, and they are prioritizing silicon for those.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| maybe they're still in development, or test production runs?
| DonHopkins wrote:
| I got an M1 Macbook Pro, and yeah, the processor is fast and cool
| and all that, but the most absolutely wonderful thing about it by
| far is that there's no touchbar!
| brailsafe wrote:
| Personally quite like the touchbar. It's not great, but I like
| it more than function keys. In particular, I like that when I'm
| screen recording, I can use the touchbar to stop the recording.
| It's a trivial little thing, but it's cool.
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| Am I the only one who just ignored the touchbar and didn't take
| it as a personal affront?
| stimpson_j_cat wrote:
| False dichotomy; I alternate between ignoring it AND being
| annoyed by it
| olliej wrote:
| The problem I have with the touchbar isn't the existence of
| it, it's that apparently my keyboard posture is terrible and
| I float fingers up their periodically. Because there's no
| force requirement for activation, I would keep triggering
| buttons. I could turn it off, but there are a few of the
| command/f buttons I use regularly, and so am stuck with it.
|
| Hence, it's a nuisance. Not something I go insane about like
| some do, but it is a very definite day-to-day annoyance.
| dumpsterdiver wrote:
| > apparently my keyboard posture is terrible and I float
| fingers up their periodically
|
| Same. The short time I was exposed to the touchbar it felt
| like I was constantly being berated for my keyboard
| posture. Apparently the "at rest" position of my left hand
| leaves my middle/ring fingers hovering over the escape key
| (I had the earlier model that didn't have a physical escape
| key).
|
| Not to mention losing access to the physical f-keys
| decimated my custom hotkey usage for certain software.
| samatman wrote:
| The internet disproportionally reflects the most extreme
| views.
|
| I think it's mildly disappointing and I won't miss it.
| reaperducer wrote:
| My work machine has one, and I use it to display status
| information, give me a proper Rub Out key, and for soft keys
| to insert certain Unicode and macros that I need
| occasionally, but not often enough to remember.
|
| I think it would have been better accepted if Apple make it
| more customizable right out of the box, instead of relying on
| half-baked solutions from tinkerers to program it.
|
| In my opinion, it should also have been _in addition_ to the
| function keys, not a replacement.
| reidjs wrote:
| Your finger never slipped and hit the "play" button by
| mistake, blasting the last song you played at max volume
| directly into your ear. Happened dozens of times in the first
| year of having a touchbar (work laptop, not my decision),
| super jarring every time. Decades of having a physical "play"
| function button hooked up to do the same thing and it didn't
| happen once.
| brailsafe wrote:
| I can't say this has ever happened, but I have fairly
| skinny fingers. I can see how it would though.
| shepherdjerred wrote:
| I really, really, really want to like the touchbar, but it just
| isn't useful to me. I wish they'd put some serious effort into
| improving it.
| krautsourced wrote:
| I don't mind the touchbar - I mind that it _replaced_ the
| F-keys! I want proper function keys! If I get some sort of
| status display _in addition_ to the keys, I'm fine with that.
| Xeoncross wrote:
| I'm not surprised they are keeping the M1 Air alive. That thing
| is a great price/performance combo in a very light and portable
| wrapper. It's been $850-$900 multiple times at Costco, Bestbuy or
| Microcenter.
|
| Also, the first computer where getting the upgraded hard drive
| (512GB or 1TB) really helps with the low ram because of the
| integration bus they have with the drive for swap. It's fast.
| paulmd wrote:
| The price increases are a kick in the shins though. 20% more
| for 18% more performance.
|
| The M1 generation looks to be a bit of an "introductory offer"
| to get people looking at apple who otherwise wouldn't have...
| once they have established their mindshare as being a
| _performance_ leader worth considering over x86, they can raise
| prices back up.
| pier25 wrote:
| I agree. The Air used to be the laptop for everyone. Now it
| has entered into MBP territory in terms of pricing and
| performance.
|
| What will happen with the M3? Will the base Air start at
| $1500?
|
| Will the M2 Air drop its price to $999 when the M3 is
| released?
|
| I'm not saying the M2 Air is not worth its price compared to
| x86 laptops, but it's ridiculous that the cheapest Apple
| laptop is way overkill for its intended audience. Even the M1
| is already overkill for users that typically spend the
| majority of their time in a browser or using Office.
| turtlebits wrote:
| The original Macbook Air when introduced had an MSRP of
| $1800.
|
| They are still selling the M1 Air at $1000.
| Macha wrote:
| The original Macbook Air was introduced to be extra light
| - it only later shifted to the entry level device as
| there used to be the base macbook for that
| pier25 wrote:
| Yeah that was at launch, but a couple of years later it
| went down to less than $1000. I bought one new around
| 2017 for about $800.
|
| For many years it was one of the most popular laptops
| ever. Popular as in admired and famous, but also for the
| people.
| sliken wrote:
| Heh, sure, if that was it. What about the larger and better
| display? Magsafe? GPU perf (35%)? Better battery life? 50%
| more memory bandwidth? More ports (2 tb +power) ?
|
| M2 starting at $1200 looks pretty nice to me. Avoids many of
| the corners cut on the competition like: plastic chassis,
| tiny trackpad, poor fans that get noisier in the first year,
| poor Intel iGPU, poor battery life, etc.
| mmmmmbop wrote:
| I feel like most of the markup comes from the new industrial
| design. The previous M1 MBA was essentially a 2018 Retina MBA
| with an upgraded chip. When the 2018 Retina MBA was
| introduced, it was also $1,199.
| wildrhythms wrote:
| I have the M1 Air and it is incredible to have such a powerful
| machine that doesn't blast an annoying fan at all times, and is
| still thin, light weight, and with a very high resolution
| display and incredible battery life. I travel frequently so
| it's the perfect laptop for me. And the best part is there's NO
| TOUCHBAR. I will absolutely be trading this in for the M2.
| shepherdjerred wrote:
| The price/performance for the M1 air is impossible to beat.
| Anyone who just needs a good laptop at a reasonable(ish) price
| can grab that and be happy for years.
| shreddit wrote:
| Can someone tell me how big of a difference in performance the
| missing fan on the air will make against the pro 13"?
| lynguist wrote:
| None, unless you're in a warm room and have a long compile job.
| For that case, which only happened once to me, I just put my
| Macbook on the cold balcony.
| saagarjha wrote:
| Generally the difference is minor and only on for very long
| builds
| [deleted]
| blinded wrote:
| yessss been waiting for a m2 mini for a new workstation
| MarioMan wrote:
| Now that we have validation that Apple is sticking with a numeric
| naming convention, I wonder how they will handle the upcoming
| naming clash with the M7 through M12 motion coprocessors used in
| the A-series chips.
| de6u99er wrote:
| I think tis is a non-issue. In 6 years nobody will remember
| those coprocessors any more.
| maskedinvader wrote:
| It was super interesting for me to see Apple not directly compare
| M2 to M1 in any of the graphs, why not directly tell us how much
| better it is than its predecessor as opposed to PC Laptop peers ?
| Jtsummers wrote:
| First graph of the first set of graphs on the page shows M2 as
| 18% better performance for the same power consumption as M1.
| First graph of the second set of graphs shows a GPU performance
| comparison between M1 and M2.
| mbreese wrote:
| Huh?
|
| https://www.apple.com/newsroom/images/live-action/wwdc-2022/...
|
| This was the first comparison on the page. M2 has 18% more
| relative performance than an M1. You can argue about the
| relative part, but the certainly included the comparison (and
| do for GPU, etc...).
| [deleted]
| aeonflux wrote:
| They had a graph with M1 and M2.
| yieldcrv wrote:
| Does this mean that a M2 Max could do 128gb RAM? That opens up
| some use cases beyond the 64gb. My world has pretty much no
| improvement between 32gb and 128gb, but I'm currently on a 64gb
| machine.
| lynguist wrote:
| It would mean 96GB. They increased from 2 memory channels per
| M1 to 3 memory channels per M2.
| royletron wrote:
| Can anyone fathom how a M2 MBP 13inch would stack up against the
| current M1Pro MBP 14-16inch? This whole CPU/GPU thing is hard to
| make out. An 8core M2 which has 12% more oomph then an M1 makes
| it equivalent to a 8.96core M1? What's wrong with clock speed...
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| 0n the return on MagSafe: they should have let Jony "Form over
| Function" Ive go much sooner. Maybe we'd still have audio jacks
| on iPhones.
| sgarman wrote:
| I can't believe I'm saying this but now that all my devices
| charge via usb-c I don't actually want magsafe that much now I
| can bring one cable and change all my portables and mac + razer
| laptops. Not worth it for me to lug around another cable just
| for magsafe.
| mnholt wrote:
| My MagSafe cord for the 2021 MBP stays at home and it's USB-C
| while on the go. Still, the return of MagSafe is welcome just
| so folks have the option.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| The best of both worlds would probably be a magnetically
| detachable USB-C cable. There are such cables out there but
| they have very very bad quality, at least those few I've
| tried.
| pdpi wrote:
| The best of both worlds is what we have today - you can use
| either magsafe or the usb-c ports, so you have the extra
| safety if you bring the extra cable, or the extra
| convenience if you can't be bothered. There's some third-
| party offerings out there for magsafe-style USB cables.
| kube-system wrote:
| That's what the new magsafe cable basically is. A magnetic
| USB-C cable that (probably) isn't garbage quality.
| corrral wrote:
| The improved battery life with M1 is so good that I pretty
| much only plug in when I'm at my desk. Most of the situations
| in which MagSafe saved me before (and there were plenty) I'm
| just not using a charger at all, now. And at my desk, I'm
| plugging into my monitor, not directly into a wall outlet. In
| fact, I almost never plug my Air into its charging brick at
| all.
| skohan wrote:
| I got a 3rd party GAN charger with 2 USB-C ports and a
| USB-A port. I can use it for charging everything, and super
| easy to pack when traveling.
| 86J8oyZv wrote:
| You actually have the option to just use any USB-C charger in
| the 3 USB-C ports though, at least on my work 14-inch M1 Pro
| MBP. I just keep the MagSafe charger in my backpack, because
| those are the situations where I'd want it (rather than at
| home... though with my dog, maybe I should get more MagSafe
| cables).
| taftster wrote:
| Would you be OK with a USB-C to MagSafe adapter?
|
| I totally get your point and can't disagree with it. But I
| really love the magsafe connector for power. It's just so
| nice. usb-c feels slow clunky in comparison. Just for a
| straight power supply use case, I think magsafe is superior
| to usb-c.
|
| So I wonder if anyone is contemplating an adapter? There's
| probably going to be too much of a mismatch of power
| requirements or something to make it viable.
| Octoth0rpe wrote:
| I am 100% with you. To add to this, in my two work
| environments (office and home), my laptop is charged via my
| monitor with a single cable. WTF would I want an additional
| cable? My magsafe adaptor went into the drawer as soon as I
| got it. Magsafe made the charger included in my m1 macbook
| pro _less useful_. My previous charger was great for
| vacations as it could charge my ipad, nintendo switch,
| headphones, or laptop.
|
| That said I'm sure it's nice for _someone_.
|
| Edit: I just realized that the magsafe connector can be
| disconnected from the brick, and a standard usb type-c cable
| can be used thusly making the charger as useful as the old
| one, provided you buy an admittedly cheap in the big picture
| cable.
| pdpi wrote:
| A permanent setup where you charge via your monitor (or
| some other desk-based equivalent) is incredibly convenient,
| but that's not the only context in which these things get
| used. If you're on the couch, in a cafe, school, or
| whatever else, the magsafe bit is amazing. It's also the
| sort of feature that you don't give a damn about until it
| saves you - my parents' dogs tossed my iBook 12" on the
| floor many times by tripping on the power cord, and that
| stopped being a problem with the first magsafe mac I got.
| Beltalowda wrote:
| Back in the day when laptops still came with a CD/DVD drive by
| default I had a customer with a broken MacBook that didn't
| power on at all, and some expensive disc was stuck in the
| drive.
|
| Pretty much all disc drives that have been produced in the
| history of disc drives come with a little pinhole where you can
| stick in a paperclip to manually push the opening mechanism
| exactly for this kind of scenario, so you can recover your disc
| if your computer or drive fails.
|
| Except Apple computers, of course, because such a useful piece
| of functionality would be _ugly_ and an abomination unto Saint
| Jobs, or something. So I had to spend a few hours opening up
| that MacBook that very clearly wasn 't designed with "opening
| up" in mind. I was lucky this machine wasn't in warranty and
| dead, so putting it back together wasn't really a concern.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| I have used to take CDs or 3 of drives with that hole and
| paperclip a great many times. Once I faced this issue with
| 2009 MacBook (white plastic one), I managed to pull the disk
| out of its drive with a very thin pliers.
| mbreese wrote:
| It's not like those Macbooks were all that difficult to take
| apart. I know I took mine apart to _remove_ the DVD drive to
| replace it with an SSD.
|
| It was something like this:
| https://everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook_pro/macbook-
| pro-u...
| Beltalowda wrote:
| It's stupid if you need to do it in the first place, and/or
| that you need to hire an IT person to do it for you. What
| if it was still in warranty? What if you wanted it
| repaired? If you needed that disc you were screwed until
| the Apple Certified(tm) repair centre could do their thing.
| selykg wrote:
| Pretty sure those had a release, it just required sticking
| the pin in the right place in the disc drive opening.
| dubswithus wrote:
| Airpods are pretty awesome. Have some trouble with switching
| between devices but still pretty great.
|
| I actually run with Garmin (Spotify & downloaded music) +
| Airpods.
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-06-06 23:00 UTC)