It was with the MacBook Faux (the 13” MBP that shares its internal with the MBA). Anyone with high performance commuting needs should definitely be looking at the 14 or 16 inch MBP instead of the Air or the legacy 13” MBP.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Rene Ritchie.. the voice of reason
- Thread starter iGeneo
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You use case would certainly be quite feasible in the M2 MBA. What most of the YouTube videos are doing is much more intensive processing that just a VS build. They are doing FCP renderings with lots of plugins on 8K video while doing other tasks. Basically they are generating their YouTube videos. When the MBA slows down to keep cool, that is declared to be “terrible throttling” and a “massive failure”. How often do you do that kind of work?
Brought a tear to my eye. That wasn't a post it was a rollercoaster ride of a short story.
But in all seriousness that's some good work. I didn't realise he was testing on an SSD that was nearly full capacity.
Last edited:
Yes, his voice cracks constantly and he speaks like he’s out of breath and trying to get out the last word of every sentence. Doesn’t really bother me but it’s real.
I still watch quite a few of his videos in the background if I’m just killing some time.
Some pathetic LOL comments from Ritchie's comment section:
"Thank you Rene. This sort of sanity, seeing through the insanity, is why I continue to subscribe to your channel."
"Rene, you’re the moral center of the tech sphere. Keep it up!"
"Thank you Rene. This sort of sanity, seeing through the insanity, is why I continue to subscribe to your channel."
"Rene, you’re the moral center of the tech sphere. Keep it up!"
In Rene Ritchie's (and his fans') interpretation, it is.So, when Apple launches a new machine boasting 'up to two times faster flash to the 13-inch MacBook Air' that's okay, but when people criticise them for silently reducing the speed, that's wrong?
I look at this “argument,” full of silly characterizations of René and Apple — and the people who are the other way, and frankly, I wonder how politics and all kinds of things on the internet have become meaningless. “Im right and you’re wrong, and if I disagree with you you’re crooked. It’s pretty clear what’s happening now, once that we have seen the progression of the M! to the M! Pro and Ultra, that the Ultras don’t change the clock speed, do the same things at the same speed as the others, but the number of cores allow you to have many more of the same kinds of calculation to exist in each added core. A very useful improvement, especially people who do pro stuff. In the end, it can transform a huge AppleProRes to an mp4 at the same speed as the chip gives you, but now you can do more of them simultaneously. The M2 is fast enough, and efficient enough, so that you can have an entry computer that won’t heat up very much. It works terrific if you’re an average user. It begins to slow down to cool down after around 5 minutes. If you don’t need the continuous speed and coolness. buy the cheaper one. If you’re making serious editing and you want to deliver something more, quicker, use the more expensive option.
Oh boy speak of the devil.
https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/20/23271599/youtube-rene-ritchie-creator-liaison
https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/20/23271599/youtube-rene-ritchie-creator-liaison
I'm not sure what everyone's problem is. Rene has never been the deepest reviewer - he's just a guy from next door, talking about apple products from the perspective of someone who doesn't know a lot about technology
and isn't enough of a nerd to learn it. I think, that's useful for many people - and the other ones already know better anyway.
and isn't enough of a nerd to learn it. I think, that's useful for many people - and the other ones already know better anyway.
I hope in this new role as liaison he does have a candid conversation with Max Tech, but also the 'SSD controversy' lol and it goes up on YouTube. that would be rad. To not would cast some doubt on the whole thing I feel like.
To just brush it all under the rug real quick like it didnt happen.
Oh yeah - and Rene probably got a lot of views out of this. Making up a controversy that people will talk about.
YouTube algorithm check ☑️
The thread should end after this post.
Well written and fact based with actual details to back everything up.
Well done 👏
I'll defend it. It's a consumer laptop. To be used for things like browsing the internet and checking email.
It doesn't need to be capable of rendering a Pixar movie in minutes.
Your parents or mine would buy the base model and be fine with it for YEARS. Macrumors forum members? No, they need Mac Pro performance in a thin, fanless machine for reasons.
He is the king of the shills for sure. Makes a living acting as if he himself worked for their marketing department. Come to think of this, I do see how you’d like him 😂
They are almost completely useless for a lot of users since they really don't test how they use a Mac.
Here is a type of task I do quite often:
* Switch to Teams
* Go into a team folder structure to locate a spreadsheet
* Double click on the file, Teams launches Excel which reads the spreadsheet (often from a server if not cached locally)
There seems to be a complete lack of benchmarking for common office tasks.
If she is dissatisfied with her Mac, then it doesn't matter what benchmarks or other people tries to tell you.
I have lots of people in my extended family using Intel-based MacBook Airs with 8Gb of RAM and 128Gb of SSD without any performance issues.
So much scientific research is of poor quality especially in the social sciences due to the pressure of publishing. And if it's based on self-reporting I don't trust it at all.
Let's say there is a scientific report on the health of marathon runners. I won't pay any attention to such a report for my own life since I'm not running marathons.
It's the same with most benchmarks. They don't reflect how I use a Mac in a good way and thus are mostly useless to me to determine if I will be happy with a Mac or not. Just as an example, can you point to me a benchmark which measure the performance of Microsoft Office applications for the Mac?
Also, sustained performance is not important to my use of a Mac. Any Mac released in the last 7-8 years has powerful enough CPUs/GPUs for my needs.
What I want from a Mac is great trackpad, as little sound as possible, low weight, Apple Watch unlock, long time on battery power, low footprint, iMessage integration, decent screen with good representation of text and colours, no warm exterior, iCloud Drive integration, iCloud Photo Library integration, bursty performance.
No benchmark can measure that.
That's exactly why most tests have various benchmarks for different application and use cases. You just have to pick the one's that resembles your workload the most.
How about "base model SSD is 50% slower"?
That doesn't matter unless you test a real workflow.
Let's say it takes 0.04 seconds to read a file instead of 0.02 seconds. Does it matter?
Using benchmark numbers from The Verge, writing 1Gb of data to the SSD seems to be a difference between 0.3 seconds versus 0.5 seconds. Again will the user notice? Maybe.
How about swapping. Probably it's writing blocks of 16kb of compressed memory to the swap. If that's the case then it sure looks more like random writes to me than sequential write. Will the user notice? Maybe, but swapping often occurs before it's needed in the background while you're doing other stuff.
And almost all the benchmark seems to involve software I don't use: Lightroom, PhotoShop, Premiere, Final Cut Pro, Cinematic 4D, Blender or test the component of the computer one component at the time.
I'm not buying parts, I'm buying a complete system in which I perform certain workflows with certain software. And benchmark can't measure those workflows at all it seems.
"The SSD sequential read speed is 50% lower" isn't putting a lot of context in it either.
For a lot of workflows you wouldn't be able to point out the difference in a blind test.
I don't need to know the CPU or GPU performance, or the performance of the SSD.
I need to know if the machine will run the software I use at an acceptable performance to me. And since I haven't seen any benchmark being close to testing the software I use and how I use such software, they are mostly useless to me.
We're arguing that most people buying the lowest end MacBook will not notice it in most cases. They don't use Lightroom or have 42MP photos. And how often do you transfer 40Gb of stuff when you have a 256Gb SSD?
Why wasn't the Youtuber using Photos and iPhone photos as examples?
Why isn't the Youtuber testing Office applications?
Also if something takes 6 minutes or 3 minutes is such a long time that I won't be sitting there waiting for it to finish. I'll do other stuff and thus it doesn't really matter to me how long it takes within reason.
And why no test of Office, Slack, Zoom, Teams? Or Adobe InDesign?
I have never used any Adobe software on Mac or FCPX.
The problem is that no such benchmark exist.
Can you point to a Mac based benchmark which involves Office and Teams?