They have beefy GPU’s that can process DirectX calls, too. But, just because the feature is there, doesn’t mean it’s being used in macOS.but many Intel Macs have beefy GPUs that can do this processing!
They have beefy GPU’s that can process DirectX calls, too. But, just because the feature is there, doesn’t mean it’s being used in macOS.but many Intel Macs have beefy GPUs that can do this processing!
So planned obsolescence...
Absolutely. And, for a user that doesn’t like planned obsolescence, they can choose a different platform. I’ve helped folks do this in the past and they’re all happier about having done it.Just a proof that Apple loves to apply senseless limitations solely because of business benefits by planned obsolescence.
Laws will come to rescue here too, just a matter of time. It’s about time to take all manufacturers into responsibility.Absolutely. And, for a user that doesn’t like planned obsolescence, they can choose a different platform. I’ve helped folks do this in the past and they’re all happier about having done it.
Laws will come to rescue here too, just a matter of time. It’s about time to take all manufacturers into responsibility.
I wonder what’s John Grubers excuse now. I remember him saying, Live Text was only possible because the M1 chip. When it was obvious Apple was just being stubborn about adding support. It would be ridiculous a feature like this would really require the M1 chip. Worse, they are still selling Intel MacBook Pros for the foreseeable future.
People who are mad at Apple for any one of a number of past crimes (canceling FCP 7 or iWeb, ending Airport, not creating a cheaper tower, not creating a cheaper monitor, being successful) will always be mad at Apple. Whether or not it’s rational doesn’t factor into itYeah this has been bizarre to me. This feature was explicitly said to NOT be coming to intel Macs, and Apple added it anyway and people are mad about it. I don't get it.
Your logic doesn’t make a whole lot of sense here. Apple initially didn’t include the text feature for Intel Macs. During the beta process, Apple realized it was technically feasible without compromising the experience, so added in the feature. And yet, this proved planned obsolescence?Sure they are in charge, that’s why they are responsible for the planned obsolescence. They changed their mind because too many users got pissed off, but as i said it was primarily a planned obsolescence to prioritize their business benefits, which got reconsidered. Simply as that, and proves how they generally tic. As soon they can, they drive their users against the wall, this feature wasn’t simply important enough to continue to piss off their users. Breaking iCloud Notes Sync builds a much stronger longer lever.
It says that it's available on M1 systems. It doesn't say that you need one. It's possible that it was always the plan to make it available on Intel if there was sufficient time to develop it.It's worth noting that as of the time of this posting, the official macOS Monterey features list still indicates that the M1 chip is required to use Live Text.
It does in fact say that you need one if there are no other models listed. The footnote is intended to tell you which models support the feature. Your interpretation of it would mean that the footnote serves no purpose.It says that it's available on M1 systems. It doesn't say that you need one.
Thanks for the comment. The text currently reads:It says that it's available on M1 systems. It doesn't say that you need one. It's possible that it was always the plan to make it available on Intel if there was sufficient time to develop it.
The machines will still perform as they did when YOU bought them . Added functionality isn't a givenLaws will come to rescue here too, just a matter of time. It’s about time to take all manufacturers into responsibility.