[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)