Good to see increased battery life. The upcoming MacBook Air with M3, especially the 15" should have similar battery life
What are you doing on the rumors site then?
The scary crazy thing about that, is no one would care about having to get 48GB if the prices Apple charged for RAM and SSD weren't scary insane.well my M2 MAX that's only 7 days old just went back for a FULL refund... now I just have to wait for my space black M3MAX, which I have noted has gone up 2K in price as you cant get them under 48GB of RAM now.
Aaaaahhh, so that was the "scary fast" part. The actual length of the event.well that event was short. all i wanted was a new usb-c magic keyboard lol. oh well.
Yeah, we already did that applauding when M1 came out.There was no innovation announced, just iterations and upgrades. These updates were impressive though for M3, and if we saw this jump in an Intel CPU between generations, we would all be applauding.
I think Scary Fast was focusing on the GPU's which got quite an upgrade. The RAM and SSD prices are for extremely fast memory and SSD's. They buy that at least a year in advance, and order from the manufacturer to have stock for at least a year of sales. This is because they need to do extensive testing, and can't easily switch or run after the spot prices today. Also, they make a cheap stock model, as there are many that buy this for simple tasks and don't need large RAM or SSD. I still have not found any other laptops, at lower prices that have the same speed and quality components.Yeah, we already did that applauding when M1 came out.
Now we are scratching our heads wondering what the "scary fast" part was supposed to be.
And still wondering what the hell is with the scary insane RAM/SSD upgrade prices.
"The RAM and SSD prices are for extremely fast memory and SSD's"I think Scary Fast was focusing on the GPU's which got quite an upgrade. The RAM and SSD prices are for extremely fast memory and SSD's. They buy that at least a year in advance, and order from the manufacturer to have stock for at least a year of sales. This is because they need to do extensive testing, and can't easily switch or run after the spot prices today. Also, they make a cheap stock model, as there are many that buy this for simple tasks and don't need large RAM or SSD. I still have not found any other laptops, at lower prices that have the same speed and quality components.
They specifically claimed same performance at half the power, compared to M1.We already knew from A17 Pro that there were no power efficiency gains from N3. This shouldn’t be a surprise. Apple chose +15% performance here. They can’t have both.
But those "off the shelf" parts aren't integrated in the SoC."The RAM and SSD prices are for extremely fast memory and SSD's"
Yeah nah. There is nothing particularly fast about Apples RAM and SSDs these days. Nope, they are simply charging 4.5x the retail price for similar quality/speed SSD's, and more or less the same markup for RAM.
I'm not talking about other laptops, I have no idea what they have. I'm talking about off the shelf parts from my local umart.com.au (a successful, long running, physical/online computer part chain store here in Australia).
Well, that is my point. These are not off-the-shelf items. The memory is embedded with the CPU inside the SOC, this increases the bandwith and makes the memory access fast. This will be the future direction of other SOC makers and separate memory modules will become a thing of the past."The RAM and SSD prices are for extremely fast memory and SSD's"
Yeah nah. There is nothing particularly fast about Apples RAM and SSDs these days. Nope, they are simply charging 4.5x the retail price for similar quality/speed SSD's, and more or less the same markup for RAM.
I'm not talking about other laptops, I have no idea what they have. I'm talking about off the shelf parts from my local umart.com.au (a successful, long running, physical/online computer part chain store here in Australia).
What has that got to do with being reamed with a 450% markup?But those "off the shelf" parts aren't integrated in the SoC.
It's not the same product. None of us know what the actual markup is, and the quality of any component isn't defined solely by type and amount. You just look at type and amount and determine it's the same. It's a perception thing reallyl. People happily pay similar amounts extra for ultra-speed RAM modules, because what they perceive is a different product. Holding it in your hand, you can see the extra cooling etc, and understand what you are paying for. With Apple, you just have a number on a piece of paper, which is not as satisfying. That doesn't mean that their markup is whichever number you just made up.What has that got to do with being reamed with a 450% markup?
There are around five companies that make DRAM / NAND modules, like SK Hynix, Micron, and Samsung. They're all the same stuff at each respective tier.It's not the same product. None of us know what the actual markup is, and the quality of any component isn't defined solely by type and amount. You just look at type and amount and determine it's the same. It's a perception thing reallyl. People happily pay similar amounts extra for ultra-speed RAM modules, because what they perceive is a different product. Holding it in your hand, you can see the extra cooling etc, and understand what you are paying for. With Apple, you just have a number on a piece of paper, which is not as satisfying. That doesn't mean that their markup is whichever number you just made up.
If Apple allowed you to use "off the shelf" components, the performance would be less, because the RAM would reside outside the SoC. I focus on the actual performance of the complete product, because with Apple, that's what you're buying. I don't care what the margin is on any individual part that goes into the product. Why should I?
You have a very nice Jobs quote in your signature, which I wholly agree with. Try applying that to being a customer: Stop focusing on whether the company makes money off of you, and start focusing on whether you are getting a good product for your money.
I'm looking at it this way: Imagine we agree that a 30% margin (margin, not markup) is "reasonable". Company A is very efficient in design and manufacturing, and sells you a product with a 60% margin. We don't buy that product, because their margins are unreasonable. Company B is inefficient in design and manufacturing, so they sell you a worse product at the same price, with 20% margin. We buy that product, because they priced it so they don't get rich from your money. Which was the better purchase? (In my line of business, this example is very much not exaggerated).
OMG, Apple's SSD's are NOT super-duper, impressively fast. They are merely mid-upper range. The RAM they use is either the latest and greatest LPDDR RAM, or for some machines, the previous generation, so again, nothing special.It's not the same product. None of us know what the actual markup is, and the quality of any component isn't defined solely by type and amount. You just look at type and amount and determine it's the same. It's a perception thing reallyl. People happily pay similar amounts extra for ultra-speed RAM modules, because what they perceive is a different product. Holding it in your hand, you can see the extra cooling etc, and understand what you are paying for. With Apple, you just have a number on a piece of paper, which is not as satisfying. That doesn't mean that their markup is whichever number you just made up.
If Apple allowed you to use "off the shelf" components, the performance would be less, because the RAM would reside outside the SoC. I focus on the actual performance of the complete product, because with Apple, that's what you're buying. I don't care what the margin is on any individual part that goes into the product. Why should I?
You have a very nice Jobs quote in your signature, which I wholly agree with. Try applying that to being a customer: Stop focusing on whether the company makes money off of you, and start focusing on whether you are getting a good product for your money.
I'm looking at it this way: Imagine we agree that a 30% margin (margin, not markup) is "reasonable". Company A is very efficient in design and manufacturing, and sells you a product with a 60% margin. We don't buy that product, because their margins are unreasonable. Company B is inefficient in design and manufacturing, so they sell you a worse product at the same price, with 20% margin. We buy that product, because they priced it so they don't get rich from your money. Which was the better purchase? (In my line of business, this example is very much not exaggerated).
It's nobody else's fault if you buy a laptop and use it as a desktop. I move around all day, every day and I rely on my mac's battery. It's the only reason I'm considering buying a new M3 as the previous one - while still powerful - can't even survive half a day anymore. I drag around a 27200mAh USB-C extra battery to be able to do at least some of my work daily.So now the laptops (that will mostly be used while plugged in, but for a couple of hours here and there unplugged) have a longer lasting battery than the watch (that is mostly used unplugged and rarely connected to power).
Always the best argument: I saw something somewhere but can't remember what it was but it was amazing and so much better than anything anyone's ever see. Or at least better than anything since sliced bread. Also, comparing apples to oranges is usually not very fruitful (pun intended).As for the 4.5x markup, that was me being generous, and based on a Samsung T7 2TB USB-C Portable SSD which I recently bought. It includes a quality aluminium case, and highish-speed USB-C cable. I recently saw a YT vid talking about this very topic, and he showed an SSD sodimm (I can't recall the particular one, but it was a high performance SSD) on Amazon, which was ~9x cheaper, and several times faster than Apple's SSD's.