Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Are you satisfied with this morning's spec bump?

Uni Grad said:
But its true, an average rationale buyer would go for the best bang for their buck.
Click to expand...

No, this is not true. Rationale does not require exclusively looking at price above all else... Rather a logical set of reasons that lead to a conclusion. In my case portability and baseline functionality at a price I don't mind paying led me to purchase a rMB for my portable device.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: deeddawg
Uni Grad said:
I think you meant to say form follows function.
In the case of the rMB, form follows function, how?

The rMB is so thin, that it throttles the core M processor, in order to prevent further heat generation.

That is clearly form OVER function.
Click to expand...

The Core M is specifically designed to throttle. Intel took a Core chip that normally operates at 15W and modified it so that it works at 4.5W. It is their most advanced mobile processor. Unlike ARM, x86/x64 was not originally designed for mobile devices, and so they heat up more quickly. Intel wanted a chip specifically for advanced mobile devices and fanless notebooks, and so designed the Core M. Apple is using it as Intel intended.
 
  • Like
Reactions: entropi, super chimp, Biggie Robs and 1 other person
Uni Grad said:
I think you meant to say form follows function.
In the case of the rMB, form follows function, how?

The rMB is so thin, that it throttles the core M processor, in order to prevent further heat generation.

That is clearly form OVER function.
Click to expand...

As stated, Core M operates like this BY DESIGN. Yes, throttling could be controlled further by adding larger heatsinks or even a fan, but both of those have the cost of additional bulk and weight (and noise). EVERY mobile computer throttles; it's just a matter of when. You don't think those 45w CPU's in the 15" Pro throttle? LOL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: super chimp, GoldfishRT, Biggie Robs and 2 others
zhenya said:
As stated, Core M operates like this BY DESIGN. Yes, throttling could be controlled further by adding larger heatsinks or even a fan, but both of those have the cost of additional bulk and weight (and noise). EVERY mobile computer throttles; it's just a matter of when. You don't think those 45w CPU's in the 15" Pro throttle? LOL.
Click to expand...

Yes but the throttle of a 3.2 gHz CPU is unlikely to make much difference to the user in processing tasks. Whereas throttling a 1.1 gHz will.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lite426
Davidkoh said:
Really good to know, thanks!

n Xcode, are you running any simulator/emulator or is it just pure text? And which model do you have? I am almost sure the m7 would handle my requirements, the question is if the m3 would.
Click to expand...

I have the 1.2 from 2015.

Just pure text at this point.
 
David58117 said:
1.2 is enough to run Logic Pro X with plugins, run Xcode, and have windows and Linux virtual machines running....

I'm really confused why you keep insisting it's incapable...

What did the 12" do to you? ....did it touch you..? Steal your girl? What happened?
Click to expand...

People just keep dragging my old post on. I'm past that post. I actually like the rMB design, just not the power.
 
Uni Grad said:
People just keep dragging my old post on. I'm past that post. I actually like the rMB design, just not the power.
Click to expand...

The MacBook m5 and m7 is faster than any MacBook Air ever made, and probably faster than most 13" MacBook Pros Macrumours users are using.
 
KPOM said:
The Core M is specifically designed to throttle. Intel took a Core chip that normally operates at 15W and modified it so that it works at 4.5W. It is their most advanced mobile processor. Unlike ARM, x86/x64 was not originally designed for mobile devices, and so they heat up more quickly. Intel wanted a chip specifically for advanced mobile devices and fanless notebooks, and so designed the Core M. Apple is using it as Intel intended.
Click to expand...

Exactly, I think its amazing what apple (plus other manufacturers) and intel have been able to do with these new mobile processors and fanless heat dissipation.

They are designed for bursty workloads, such as web browsing, word processing, excel, and other low utilization workloads like steaming music and watching movies. These processors are perfect for consumer devices like the macbook.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Biggie Robs
Uni Grad said:
I think you meant to say form follows function.
In the case of the rMB, form follows function, how?

The rMB is so thin, that it throttles the core M processor, in order to prevent further heat generation.

That is clearly form OVER function.
Click to expand...

No, I meant to say exactly what I said.

No one cares about throttling or any of this horsepower-wars nonsense anymore. Any computer over $500 will launch a browser and get you to Facebook in fractions of seconds, there is nothing lost by having so-called "slower" processors for those of us who aren't heavy multitaskers, who don't do heavy gaming, who aren't compiling 4K videos, basically for 99% of the consumer base.

You can stop trolling now. We get it. You don't like the RMB just like the broken-record bloggers who slammed the RMB when it was first launched. Just like we told them, this isn't the machine for you. You're looking for a student-based budget notebook with a bunch of legacy ports at a strong comparative value. You're not going to find that here. This is where the rich people go to get something sexy and light. You want Timex, this is Rolex.

BJ
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jayderek and iToph
Just leave Uni Grad alone for the moment. He probably feels ganged up on at this point, and is typing reflexively in defence of his original stance. He may feel different about people 'dragging his post on' or 'forcing him to understand the greatness of the rMB' in a few days time when the automaticity of defence wears off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Biggie Robs, iToph, Jayderek and 1 other person
boltjames said:
No, I meant to say exactly what I said.

No one cares about throttling or any of this horsepower-wars nonsense anymore. Any computer over $500 will launch a browser and get you to Facebook in fractions of seconds, there is nothing lost by having so-called "slower" processors for those of us who aren't heavy multitaskers, who don't do heavy gaming, who aren't compiling 4K videos, basically for 99% of the consumer base.

You can stop trolling now. We get it. You don't like the RMB just like the broken-record bloggers who slammed the RMB when it was first launched. Just like we told them, this isn't the machine for you. You're looking for a student-based budget notebook with a bunch of legacy ports at a strong comparative value. You're not going to find that here. This is where the rich people go to get something sexy and light. You want Timex, this is Rolex.

BJ
Click to expand...

So are implying that only rich people should buy it, because it sure sounds that way?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Uni Grad
super chimp said:
So are implying that only rich people should buy it, because it sure sounds that way?
Click to expand...
How'd you come up with that?

Yes, the rMB is certainly targeted at folks willing and able to pay a premium for extreme portability.
Common sense suggests it'd be dumb for someone who can't afford an rMB to buy one.

Still not making the leap to suggesting only rich people should buy an rMB.
 
deeddawg said:
How'd you come up with that?

Yes, the rMB is certainly targeted at folks willing and able to pay a premium for extreme portability.
Common sense suggests it'd be dumb for someone who can't afford an rMB to buy one.

Still not making the leap to suggesting only rich people should buy an rMB.
Click to expand...

Well if you can't see where it appears to be implying this in the OP I am not going to point it out as I thought it was pretty obvious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Uni Grad
super chimp said:
So are implying that only rich people should buy it, because it sure sounds that way?
Click to expand...

No, but in the year we've been debating this particular notebook it seems to confuse and astound those who are looking to save a buck, those who think it is of "low value", young unemployed students, and people holding on to a 10 year old MacBook Air.

When you take an item that has the performance of a 2008 notebook, wrap it in a sexy body, and price it through the stratosphere, it becomes a luxury by definition. I own a $20,000 Rolex. You own a $200 Timex. Do they both tell time? Do they both "function" properly? Is one a lousy value and the other more reasonable? The RMB is like that. "Value" is not just in telling time; "value" to a segment of the population is telling time in a very attractive and well-engineered manner.

BJ
 
  • Like
Reactions: David58117
TigerMSTR said:
The MacBook m5 and m7 is faster than any MacBook Air ever made, and probably faster than most 13" MacBook Pros Macrumours users are using.
Click to expand...
No, it is not.
http://browser.primatelabs.com/user/102371
air 2015
https://browser.primatelabs.com/gee...:"Intel Core i7-5650U" frequency:2200 bits:64
But it is close to my 2013 11" i7 air, especially multicore:
https://browser.primatelabs.com/gee...:"Intel Core i7-4650U" frequency:1700 bits:64

No doubt, I would choose a Macbook Retina over an Macbook Air today, if didn't need the ports. But I am still not tempted to switch out my air yet. The upside of my air's low resolution, is that it never skips a beat with mission-control animations or any UI animations. Also not a fan of the butterfly keyboard travel either, my air keyboard is already a step back compared to my previous Macbook Pro.
 
Significant1 said:
No, it is not.
http://browser.primatelabs.com/user/102371
air 2015
https://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/search?q=model:"MacBook Air (11-inch Early 2015)" platform:"Mac" processor:"Intel Core i7-5650U" frequency:2200 bits:64
But it is close to my 2013 11" i7 air, especially multicore:
https://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/search?q=model:"MacBook Air (11-inch Mid 2013)" platform:"Mac" processor:"Intel Core i7-4650U" frequency:1700 bits:64

No doubt, I would choose a Macbook Retina over an Macbook Air today, if didn't need the ports. But I am still not tempted to switch out my air yet. The upside of my air's low resolution, is that it never skips a beat with mission-control animations or any UI animations. Also not a fan of the butterfly keyboard travel either, my air keyboard is already a step back compared to my previous Macbook Pro.
Click to expand...

Sorry I was talking about the i5 airs, which is not considered to be a low powered notebook at all. The MacBook is faster than all the i5 MacBook Airs
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back