You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
My Surface tablet thing seems to be on it's last legs with a knackered battery so it's replacement time.
I fancy going back to a macbook this time.
I've got my eye on the late 2020 model Macbook Air with the M1 processor.
Is it worth paying the extra £200 to upgrade from 8gb ram to 16gb?
The 256gb hard drive is plenty for what I use but I'm unsure if the extra ram will futureproof it to some extent.
I understand that there's going to be a new model coming out some time soon but no one appears to know when that'll be.
It largely depends on your use case.
But given the general longevity of Mac’s and that the memory is not upgradable I would if it was me.
I would say it is. As software evolves it only ever demands more from the hardware and assuming it’s not possible it easy to upgrade RAM later on then better to do it now. I’ve always noticed an improvement whenever I’ve upgraded RAM not just in boot up and shut down time but in the general smoothness and running of the machine and I don’t run any demanding software so if you did you’d notice it there too.
Slightly off topic but if Mac's have greater longevity than a PC then what is the expected lifespan of each?
Slightly off topic but if Mac’s have greater longevity than a PC then what is the expected lifespan of each?
They don't, that's a myth. Pay Mac money for a PC and it'll last as long or longer. I bought my laptop in 2008.
In the corporate world I'd expect a tech refresh maybe every 3-5 years?
Probably. Though my SO gets on fine with 8GB. Double the hard drive too if you can.
Agree with pretty green parrot, the M1 macs have amazing performance with 8gb, the money’s better spent on increasing the storage as that can fill pretty quickly and they only have two USB ports.
Our work has the same refresh cycle for both Mac and PC.
Macs often last longer than PCs because there is no such thing as a cheap Mac*, however there are loads of cheap PCs which do fail because they're cheap.
* You may or may not think this is a good thing.
I think the rapid requirements for extra memory are over (assuming general use rather than video editing etc.)
Not sure about Macs lasting longer than PCs - typing this from my 7 year old Lenovo Ideapad. I'll probably replace it with a MacBook when it dies though.
The Mac Lifespan seems to be around 10 years. This is usually the point at which the software can not be updated to the latest OS as the hardware is not up to the job of running it. At this point there's usually around 2 years of security updates to allow for banking to do its job. After that you're on your own and the security risks increase as the years pass.
My G5 PowerMac tower ran for 15 years before dodgy RAM socket soldering saw it recycled. The latest Mac mini is now 9 and may need to be refreshed to allow for secure banking at home to continue.
(Yes encrypted comms to the bank are still possible but the chances of slippery bank staff telling us that our lost money is due to a poorly secured OS and they're not going to refund is not worth the trouble).
They don’t, that’s a myth. Pay Mac money for a PC and it’ll last as long or longer. I bought my laptop in 2008.
This is certainly true for on paper hardware spec's, but I think there are differences in the operating systems, i.e. windows vs Mac OS, that matter over time. I think Mac OS just seems to be less demanding and far simpler than Windows, so on older machines, even if you've upgraded the hardware (usual SSD/RAM upgrades) Macs seem to do better.
A case in point (I know sample size of 1 etc.) I've just resurrected my dads mid 2011 iMac with a new SSD and more RAM and cloned my 2017 iMac HDD to get it running and it honestly runs as well as my 2017 iMac. Similarly tried to get a new lease of life out of my daughters 5 year old HP laptop by SSD upgrade and it didn't really works. Was a BOS before I upgraded the HDD and even with an SSD and fresh Windows install its still running crap. That has to be down to the software. Now it may be the case if I were a bit of a computer nerd then I could get into the guts of Windows and mess around with a bunch of settings and fanny about alot and get it running sweet. But the point is I have not needed to do that with the Mac. Just plug and play and you're away. Dad's 2011 iMac will go on to provide many years of useful work but daughters laptop is going to the tip.
Ram, I would upgrade it if possible.. the demands on the machine are only increasing and its a bit of a future proof thing. Dropbox etc can increase storage so I would do the ram in preference.
Pay Mac money for a PC and it’ll last as long or longer.
This is about the size of it. Macs are made with premium materials, for a premium price. There are premium priced PCs out there too, which are (often) also very good.
My 2015 Mac laptop is still going strong (hasn't been upgraded) and although the world of music tech software is starting to overtake it, I expect it to be fine for general internet /light work duties for a good few years yet.
Interesting thoughts, I have a 2008 MacBook that had the constant beach ball of death and trackpad issues well before 10 years of light use. I was wondering whether it was worth trying to fix as I rarely use a computer outside of work so it's not worth me buying something.
Is it worth paying the extra £200 to upgrade from 8gb ram to 16gb?
Definitely yes, I've got the base model 8gb, I'll be selling it at some point and probably going pro and 16gb. (though might just go air with 16 and larger HD, do like the fanless and I don't really touch max on the processor)
8gb, is the obvious bottleneck in the system if you use multiple apps.
Depends what you are doing with it obviously, but if you are going to be using indesign/illy/photoshop/lightroom/premier. defo get 16gb and the pro if you can afford it.
The 8gb air is well usable, but it's always in the orange/red on the memory pressure for me the way I work computers. (ie everything open and constantly switching between.)
Other than that it's a really nice machine. battery I get about 9-12 hours on it unplugged with solid usage, with no degradation in performance. I think the pro will get you about 20 hours if that's important to you.
Same here; 8gb MBP, M1. The add'l 8Gb is definitely worth it, I would have bought the 16Gb model if I could have found one in stock. Go 16.
Max out the RAM if you can, as others note it's not really upgradeable.
My iMac is now 12yrs old and I'm a couple of OS iterations off the curve. This is now having knock-on effects with more recent software updates not being usable (or indeed installable).
Macs and PCs all use pretty much the same components, it's just that Apple tend to use a small selection that they know will work together and also have high MTBF. Buy a PC to the same spec and it's likely to last as long and cost similar to a Mac. I've not used later versions of Windows but I used to do an annual reformat and reinstall to make sure things kept running smoothly (I partitioned the disk into OS, personal and installed software partitions) so the reformat of drive C just blatted the OS.
Did I dream it or is there some chat that the M1 machines run well with relatively low memory because of some special voodoo on the motherboard? Or is that just an iPhone vs Android thing?
If you want futureproofing then the pc wins hand down.
APPLE deliberately remove older features in macos on a regular basis.
I bought an imac I think about 18 months ago. When I bought it macs could run 32 bit software.
AN OS update just 2 weeks later removed all support for 32bit software and it now only runs 64 bit apps.
Fine if you only run the latest apps. A big problem if you run older software which is never likely to be updated. - very common in my industry.
I was also annoyed find that apple had deliberately removed the feature that let you use imacs as a monitor for a pc or games console.
Im looking at a similar decision only Im interested in the Mac mini as I dont need portability. From what I have read its worth getting the extra RAM but not the extra SSD because you can thunderbolt extra SSD on later if needed. I dont know if thats an option with the air
bar having to run niche software, the only reason for running Windows is that the hardware is cheaper. Can you imagine being able to afford a Mac, but buying a PC instead 🤣🤣🤣Pay Mac money for a PC and it’ll last as long or longer
what is the expected lifespan of each?
Typing this on my mid-2012 MBP. 256 SSD and 16GB quad i7. Bought used two years ago. I've just updated it to Catalina and that's where it will stay. Looking now, I'g get the same 2015 modelwithouga DVD ROM. About £750 for a mint one. The new ones have been slated for keyboard (now fixed), lack of ports (coming) and the funny volume smart slider ( I like dedicated keys - also coming allegedly).
The M1's look very fast, but I want to run a virtual LINUX machine and I don't think that VMWare have updated yet.
Can you imagine being able to afford a Mac, but buying a PC instead
I have a choice at work. I prefer Windows - Mac OS looks dated and crude now. I ordered a Mac for my replacement machine, but only because the Lenovo X1 wasn't available with 16Gb from my company. If it had been, it'd have been a no brainer. A much better device for me since I want portability. If I didn't, I'd have got a Lenovo P51 with much more RAM and CPU power than the best MacBook on offer.
I think Mac OS just seems to be less demanding and far simpler than Windows, so on older machines, even if you’ve upgraded the hardware (usual SSD/RAM upgrades) Macs seem to do better.
This might've been the case 15 years ago but it's not now. I just put an SSD in my original Lenovo W520 that I had in 2011 from work, so I could use it as a Zwift machine. It flies with W10 on it and it boots up a lot faster than either of my Macs (also work).
The last time I booted my Mac up was when I installed a new battery in it last summer, other than when it does it's own restarts on updates. Personally, I would never go back to Windows, but each to their own. I despise my works PC laptop with a passion.
As they say, ‘When you go Mac, you don’t go back’. I switched 2 years ago and find Mac OS a far nicer place to spend time compared with the uninspiring world of Windows.
But back on topic, I bought an M1 MBA 16Gb in Nov. I hammer it a lot for work - including Final Cut Pro - and it’s an incredibly capable machine. Seriously rapid, super smooth, perfectly quiet and cool. It’s a game changer IMO. The 8Gb machines are not far behind in terms of speed as lots of people, including professionals, sing their praises. I only opted for 16Gb as it guaranteed me max performance at the time of purchase and a bit more future proofing. If you can justify the £200 then go for it. Re storage, I went with 512Gb and use an external 1Tb Samsung T7 SSD for FCP files - more than rapid enough and far cheaper than upping the SSD at POS.
atest Linux Kernel is supposed to be M1 compatible.
Sadly it’s SAS running on that virtual machine Unix machine. But I may go full fat SAS MacOS anyway.
To be honest, the only real difference is how poor Outlook is on MacOS. I use both MBP and my work HP laptop. Current the HP has a borked battery circuit so use both for team and document bashing. I like the MPB but it’s the quality of the old machine, hewn from solid aluminium. The Mercedes 340 of the laptop works.
APPLE deliberately remove older features in macos on a regular basis.
I bought an imac I think about 18 months ago. When I bought it macs could run 32 bit software.
AN OS update just 2 weeks later removed all support for 32bit software and it now only runs 64 bit apps
https://winaero.com/windows-11-hardware-requirements-32-bit-windows-is-not-longer-a-thing/
Yes. I've got a 2012 Mac Air which would be absolutely fine still if it weren't for the fact that it's 4GB and not upgradeable.
Is that the going rate for memory these days, or is there more to the "better" one than just 8gb extra ?
To be honest, the only real difference is how poor Outlook is on MacOS.
TBF standard mail on our work Macs is currently a shambles with Office365. IMAP is not syncing around the network for us and I've not tracked down a way to cure it yet. Throw in older machines that are running High Sierra and it's a bundle of laughs.
I think there are differences in the operating systems, i.e. windows vs Mac OS, that matter over time.
This is true.
I think Mac OS just seems to be less demanding and far simpler than Windows, so on older machines, even if you’ve upgraded the hardware (usual SSD/RAM upgrades) Macs seem to do better.
But this is bollocks.
I’ve just resurrected my dads mid 2011 iMac
Is it running the latest version of MacOS?
My 2008 PC laptop is running the bleeding edge version of Windows. Your dad's Mac shit out years ago.
tried to get a new lease of life out of my daughters 5 year old HP laptop
...
That has to be down to the software
Seems legit. Did you pay north of a grand for the HP also?
the only reason for running Windows is that the hardware is cheaper. Can you imagine being able to afford a Mac, but buying a PC instead
"The only reason for running MacOS is that the hardware is more expensive. Can you imagine being able to buy a PC that will do everything you need, yet spending half as much again for no other reason than to be able to lord it over the plebs?"
lol, etc.
Can you imagine a Mac thread left to its own without the windows zealots?
Read the link that you have posted and you will see that whilst windows itself is going 64 bit only and will need a 64 bit processor it will retain compatibility with old 32 bit software.
That is not true of apples approach which deliberately removes compatability with old software. in apples case at the release of Catalina it broke a lot of commercially available programs which contained older code.
Regardless of the arguments from the Windows/OS X fanbois- the bottom line is that in 5 years time your Mac will be worth a good chunk of what you paid for it, whereas the Windows machine will have depreciated far quicker.
These days both OS’s are solid, and more similar than ever.
Once you’ve paid the initial Apple tax, there’s not much difference when replacing as you’ll recoup much more for your old MacBook.
Some interesting comments there guys, thanks.
My current Surface wasn’t far off the price of a MacBook Air when I bought it, from memory it was only about £100 cheaper. By comparison, my other half’s MacBook Air is about eight years old and still works a treat, my Surface at half the age not so much!
Having looked around I can get the 8gb model for under £900 and the cheapest I can find the 16gb is £1200 so I think I’ll keep the £300 difference and go for the lower spec model.
bar having to run niche software, the only reason for running Windows is that the hardware is cheaper.
Backwards compatibility is far superior to Macs. I have some expensive niche software and scanners that I need for my work (and, to be fair, they are Windows only). Most of that stuff was bought for Win 7 or XP, but still runs fine under Win10. Try running a printer or scanner or software from 2006 on a brand new Mac, pretty much guaranteed to not work.
Can you imagine a Mac thread left to its own without the windows zealots?
No chance. There's 2 types of people in this world; those who buy Macs, and those who regret not buying a Mac,and therefore need to spend their time telling everyone how much better Windows/PCs are in a futile attempt to justify their own existence and pretend their lives are not a complete failure. 😉
Back to the original topic...
A friend has the M1 MBA with 8GB RAM,and says it's absolutely fine for most things, perhaps a little slower for gaming. He's not doing stuff like hi res video etc, although he does use Fusion360 and says it runs fine.
My 2008 PC laptop is running the bleeding edge version of Windows.
How are you getting on with Premiere Pro and After Effects?
Ah...
Sadly it’s SAS running on that virtual machine Unix machine. But I may go full fat SAS MacOS anyway.
Docker no use for this?
I have an M1 Macbook Pro with 8Gb. It's well fast enough for my workflows which include some complex GIS processing in FME/QGIS and software development. I'd argue that as a Surface replacement you'd be happy with 8Gb. If you can afford the extra then do it. There will always be workflows where you're swapping to/from disk and this will make a difference. No amount of processor magic can ever compensate for the grunt of moving data in/out of memory.
Try running a printer or scanner or software from 2006 on a brand new Mac, pretty much guaranteed to not work.
I could use a VM for that but I'd rather not rely on software that isn't being developed for the current IT environment with all its flaws and holes.
No chance. There’s 2 types of people in this world; those who buy Macs, and those who regret not buying a Mac,and therefore need to spend their time telling everyone how much better Windows/PCs are in a futile attempt to justify their own existence and pretend their lives are not a complete failure. 😉
Not really there are people who buy what does the particular task they need it to do best.
I have a macbook pro I use to make music, pretty much the only thing I use it for. I used linux for work and pretty much any general tasks that need doing. I use windows when I can't do what I want on the other two. I am not anti windows, just not as familiar with it as I used to be. It does seem like MS have really worked hard to make it a viable option for more techy people now. Hyper V and WSL are quite exciting developments.
As they say, ‘When you go Mac, you don’t go back’.
I went back. Mainly due to defective battery, defective replacement battery and defective replacement replacement battery, and forced obsolecence at 4 years.
I refused to ever go back to Apple, but M1 is piquing my interest, but only if I can dual boot Linux on it.
At least with M1 you know it's so new that it's going to be a fair while before Apple decide you are not allowed to "experience" your laptop.
Either way, I'd get 16meg. Pretty much all laptops now are either non-upgradeable with soldered RAM, or you have to crack them apart with a spudger and something will never go back quite right. Even my Macbook never went back together as neatly as from the factory, when I unscrewed the bracket to install an new HDD and double the RAM.
Docker no use for this?
Don't think so - SAS supply the University Edition as a compiled virtual machine disk image - about to be decommissioned in August. Their online system is also very good. But I run locally under VMware at the moment. I bought the Mac for my son to run unix and Matlab for a Masters. It sat unloved for a year, so I though I'd recommission it. It's just an operating system really. And 2.5 kilos of aluminium! My eyesight doesn't justify the Retina screen.
Try running a printer or scanner or software from 2006 on a brand new Mac, pretty much guaranteed to not work.
I've run plenty of older hardware from all sorts of Macs (I have a USB floppy disc drive from around 2000, that still works on any current Mac). But aside from that; a lot of that older hardware is either shit compared to current stuff, or has broken anyway. Why would I want to use a 15 year old printer, when current printing technology is infinitely better? Whilst I agree that built in obsolescence is a bad thing, to try to use backwards compatibility as a way of trying to claim one platform is better, is just silly really. What ancient hardware/software are you trying to use? And anyway; you can always find an older, perfectly working Mac to run it, if you really need to.
Not really
No really.
But aside from that; a lot of that older hardware is either shit compared to current stuff, or has broken anyway. Why would I want to use a 15 year old printer, when current printing technology is infinitely better?
I'm not talking about cheap consumer stuff. This is expensive professional hardware and software that still functions perfectly well running Win10. No VMs needed.
This happens every time Mac fanbois do the "there is no benefit to running Windows", then when the benefits of running Windows are pointed out, it's "Yeah, but I don't want to do that anyway." Maybe you don't, but I need it to do my job.
On the longevity issue, as the finance industry says past performance is not indicative of future results. For example, I'm not expecting my 2 year old Intel iMac to last as long as it's predecessor, a 2007 iMac, because the focus for both Apple and application developers now will be on Apple Silicon. Similarly a whole swathe of PC's will be unable to run Windows 11, including the perfectly servicable 6 year old desktop I'm typing this on, because of some apparently arbitrary choices by Microsoft. Now's probably a good time to get into the electronics recycling business.
@thols that backwards compatibility comes at a cost. Did you know that Windows used to contain code to change the memory mode if SimCity was detected to be running? This was done as a workaround as MS were ( and probably still are) paranoid about anything not working. It's been to the detriment of the OS as a whole and the API is an absolute dogs dinner as a result.
What gets on my t1ts is the OP asked a simple question to those who use and advocate Macs. The thread title didn't ask the windoze experts to pitch in. but of course the usual suspects can't help themselves as they need self validation in the choice they chose to make.
I’m not talking about cheap consumer stuff. This is expensive professional hardware and software that still functions perfectly well running Win10. No VMs needed.
And what actual percentage of all computer users would that affect? 1? 0.5? 0.1? There are plenty of people using older hardware in say music recording studios etc, who are perfectly happy to use an old Mac that doesn't need updating. If it ain't broke... But the reality is, that the vast majority of computer users really don't need to worry about such things. And people need hardware that can cope with the increasing demands from the other devices they use; you won't find someone trying to do 4k+ video with a 2008 PC laptop. Likewise, someone who needs to create simulations for medical research, won't want an ancient, slow old machine, they need the very latest, fastest kit, and that often tends to be pretty exotic proprietary equipment anyway; they wouldn't want the instability of Windows messing things up. So whatever argument that can be made for backwards compatibility, there's always a counter argument as to why this isn't valid anyway. Bottom line is. The vast majority of us don't need all that anyway, we just want something to work without fuss and bother. Which is one of Apple's strengths; strip out all you don't need, and it's a much sleeker, slicker and more efficient experience.
Can you imagine a Mac thread left to its own without the windows zealots?
Thing is, there aren't any Windows zealots. There are just anti-Mac-Fanboi-bullshit people. No-one is saying Windows is better, we are just pointing out the stupid rubbish Mac fans spout. Like this:
There’s 2 types of people in this world; those who buy Macs, and those who regret not buying a Mac
That's what gets my goat. It's idiotic. Even if the poster wasn't serious plenty are.
Feel free to get a Mac if you want one. I have two. My personal preference is still Windows, for the OS and the choice of hardware, but whatever. They both work, there are pros and cons to both.
anti-Mac-Fanboi-bullshit people
Why do these people exist though? What service do they provide for humanity? Don't get me wrong, Mac fanboys can be annoying for sure - but 'anti-Mac-Fanboi-bullshit people' appear to be a subtype of humanity a further degree of separation away from any sensible decision making discussions and apparently exist only to cause conflict.
Thing is, there aren’t any Windows zealots. There are just anti-Mac-Fanboi-bullshit people. No-one is saying Windows is better, we are just pointing out the stupid rubbish Mac fans spout. Like this:
There’s 2 types of people in this world; those who buy Macs, and those who regret not buying a Mac
That’s what gets my goat. It’s idiotic. Even if the poster wasn’t serious plenty are.
Lol!
Sent from my expensive and superior Apple device.
but ‘anti-Mac-Fanboi-bullshit people’ appear to be a subtype of humanity a further degree of separation away from any sensible decision making discussions and apparently exist only to cause conflict.
I point out bullshit and idiocy wherever I see it. As I've said, I view both platforms as equivalent, I chose my laptop based on the size and spec available to me. I am happy for people to prefer whatever.
Mac fans though can be quite good at persuading people to perhaps spend more money than they can afford on a Mac or iPad because they think they need to.
Sent from my expensive and superior Apple device.
Android, actually.
TiRed
Free Member
Docker no use for this?Don’t think so – SAS supply the University Edition as a compiled virtual machine disk image
Parallels is M1 native. I've got it running the arm version of W10 and ubuntu. 16gb defo required for those though. And you might run into software issues. I've apps that just won't work on arm
And what actual percentage of all computer users would that affect?
I have no idea, but it affects me. I was responding to someone who was unaware of this advantage of Windows. It may not affect most users, but it's still an advantage.
that backwards compatibility comes at a cost.
Things always come at a cost. If you remove backwards compatibility for the sake of a sleeker OS, it comes at the cost of backwards compatibility. If you maximize backwards compatibility, you will get a more complex OS. For what I do, backwards compatibility is a massive benefit.
whatever argument that can be made for backwards compatibility, there’s always a counter argument as to why this isn’t valid anyway.
I have some expensive software and hardware that I can't afford to throw away and replace. Win10 has backwards compatibility that runs it perfectly. That's a valid argument. There is no counter argument that makes it invalid. Windows lets me get my job done. I couldn't do that with Mac OS.
Parallels is M1 native. I’ve got it running the arm version of W10 and ubuntu.
Thanks - looks promising. I'd only be going with 16GB. What I would really like is a 15" MacBook Air. I'm done with small screens now (HP laptop is 13" and really too small for my eyes), but like the light form factor. I use a stand (NEXTSTAND K7 or Roost), keyboard and mouse with 15". I use a 22" monitor with the 13" HP.
I have no idea, but it affects me
In the big scheme of things, how important do you think YOU are, individually, to a company like Apple? I totally get what you're saying, but you have to agree, Apple writing their OS for such individual use case scenarios, isn't practical for their particular business model. And what will you do if Windows 11 no longer supports your hard/software requirements?
Android, actually.
It was a jo.... never mind.
So are you running X86 Linux under parallels on an M1 Mac?
Good news if you are.
Nah it's an ARM version of Windows.
Mac fans though can be quite good at persuading people to perhaps spend more money than they can afford on a Mac or iPad because they think they need to.
? As a 'Mac Fan', I often advise people to buy a Mac, if they ask for my opinion on a new computer. As long as they don't want to spend just £300 or so. Sure; some might buy something that is way overkill for their actual needs, I think this is probably true for many people. But then many who have gone on and bought Macs have expressed positive feedback about their decisions. My wife uses a work-supplied PC, but has no desire to own her own computer, her 'phone is adequate for her needs. Were she to need something a bit bigger, an iPad would fit the bill perfectly. Of course there are cheaper options; there aren't any better ones though. The Apple products offer better value, ultimately, for many users. Because they tend to suit people's needs better, are simpler to use, offer a better user experience, and retain their value for longer.Yes; Apple do sell 'premium' products, but that's their business model. And people are free to make their own choices, surely?
And what will you do if Windows 11 no longer supports your hard/software requirements?
The PC I use to run the scanner and critical software isn't Win11 compatible. In the short term, I will have to keep running Win10 for that.
I'm reasonably confident that a new PC with Win11 will run it all. Will look at the next year once Win11 is established. If it won't run it, I'll have to just keep the old PC with Win10 to run that stuff. Not really a big change to now, that's really all that I use that machine for anyway, it's just that I'll have to disconnect it from the internet when security updates stop for Win10.
If it won’t run it, I’ll have to just keep the old PC with Win10 to run that stuff. Not really a big change to now, that’s really all that I use that machine for anyway
So how is that different to someone running an old Mac to use old hard/software?
So how is that different to someone running an old Mac to use old hard/software?
At this point, we don't know what Microsoft are doing with any certainty. My machines have old motherboards that don't support TPM2.0, which Microsoft say is required for Win11. However, nobody seems sure how strict MS will be about the hardware requirements (hard floor or soft floor?)
On the software front, as I understand it, new Macs will not run any 32 bit software, but I'm not up to date on that. I have 2012 Macbook Pro that I use to run Win10 in bootcamp, but that can't update to the latest MacOS so I haven't bothered following what Apple are doing.
Win11 will require a 64 bit processor, it will not install on a 32 bit processor. However, as far as I know, it will still support 32 bit apps. That suggests that my hardware and software will probably run under Win 11. Obviously, we need to wait to see what will actually run, but continuing to support 32 bit apps would be a massive advantage for backwards compatibility for Microsoft.
Yes; Apple do sell ‘premium’ products, but that’s their business model. And people are free to make their own choices, surely?
Yes, as said I've no problem with Apple making premium stuff (actually I kind of do but that's a separate discussion). What I have a problem with is people telling people like my parents that they NEED a Mac and Windows simply won't do. Well, it will, and it does. They would've found the grand or so required for a Mac if they'd let their (rich) friends talk them into it, but it would have required significant compromises elsewhere. Then they'd have had a harder time integrating their cheap Android phones to it, and their friends would have gone "oh you simply MUST get an iPhone for £600" and so on. As it happens, the £350 Windows laptop I helped them buy was fine until someone spilled a drink on it some 6 or 7 years after it was bought.
Of course there are cheaper options; there aren’t any better ones though.
Again this assumes people have the money. If you are on a budget, a £1000 Mac is absolutely not better than a £400 PC, especially if you are just surfing and writing the odd document etc.
Can you imagine a Mac thread left to its own without the windows zealots?
...
The thread title didn’t ask the windoze experts to pitch in. but of course the usual suspects can’t help themselves as they need self validation in the choice they chose to make.
Ah, irony. Have you ever seen a Windows thread? "My printer has stopped working" - "buy a Mac!" You should listen to yourselves.
Anyway, Molgrips has said mostly what I was going to say. I'm neither anti-Mac nor a Windows zealot, Apple make great kit and I couldn't care less what platform you choose to hang your hat on.
What I do care about is the spreading of propaganda and misinformation. The fruity fans routinely compare a £2,000 Mac to a £300 PC and go "look, the Mac is so much better!" Of course it is, you could replace the PC five or six times over for what the Mac cost. A £2,000 PC would grind a Mac into the dirt.
How are you getting on with Premiere Pro and After Effects?
I've no idea what point you're trying to make here? They aren't products I use but if I did I expect I'd get on with them just fine, thanks.
seosamh77
Full Member
@seosamh77So are you running X86 Linux under parallels on an M1 Mac?
Good news if you are.
Nah it’s an ARM version of Windows.
ARM verions of ubuntu I meant, 20.04 arm64 to be exact. To be honest I don't use ubuntu at all, I just stuck it in to have a look see how linux is these days.
I mean, if I was a zealot keen to rag on Apple then I'd be shining a light on you paying £200 for an 8GB upgrade. An 8GB DDR4 SODIMM is like £40, if you've only got one slot even then a single 16GB stick is twice that. "Non-upgradeable memory" and storage too I believe, on a machine costing north of four figures, you're having your pants pulled down.
But I'm not, so I won't.
especially if you are just surfing and writing the odd document etc.
That's a very good point actually. There's a "what laptop" thread like every other week and they're always the same, "for email, surfing the Internet, writing an occasional letter..." You can do what most people want to do on something that's little removed from an Etch-a-Sketch.
@seosamh77 Cheers for the info.
I just ordered a fully pimped out Dell XPS 17 with an 11th gen i9, RTX3060 GPU etc for work. Apple don't even do an 11th gen intel macbook as I guess they are transitioning to ARM. So I can't buy a macbook in the spec I wan't anymore.
(Windows 11 discussion probably deserves its own thread rather than derailing this one any further?)
you’re having your pants pulled down
Hehe. A lightening to 3.5mm adapter for iPhone is £9 - this is surprisingly reasonable (ok so Google gave them away for free with Pixel 2s but whatever). However the 1m long version with a plug on the end instead of a socket is £35. They're charging you £26 for 95cm of cable! Lololol
Have you ever considered it might be down to form factor? Slots take space, in thin form factors it can be more expensive to cut upgrade holes then leave solid, etc..
Anyway this is a Mac thread for us experts so go help out the Windows printer guy 😉
Isn't the RAM part of the M1 system-on-a-chip? I have no idea how much it costs Apple to add more memory to the SOC but the days of slotting in a DIMM are very much gone.
I honestly don't know what I would do for RAM with an M1. I strongly suspect 8Gb would be enough, for the same reason that iPhones seem to need a lot less RAM than Androids for the same performance. I'd probably still spend the extra to be safe but I certainly don't think everyone needs to.
(ok so Google gave them away for free with Pixel 2s but whatever)
Apple used to give them away with iPhones. I got one with my X, but I very rarely use it.
I was a zealot, then...[snip]
But I’m not, so I won’t.
But you did. So you are? 😛
Do I need to put a smiley after every post?! (-:
Isn’t the RAM part of the M1 system-on-a-chip?
Dunno actually, it's not an architecture I've really looked at yet. If it is then it wouldn't surprise me if the 8GB parts weren't failed 16GB parts with half of it switched off. I'll do some reading when I've got a slow evening.
Gosh, folk have strong feelings about operating systems don't they?
https://www.macworld.com/article/234843/m1-macs-memory-isnt-what-it-used-to-be.html
Like Intel chips with integrated graphics, the M1 chip includes a graphics processor, and system memory is shared by both processor cores and graphics cores. (And also, in the M1’s case, the cores that make up the Neural Engine.) But in shifting its terminology to describe a unified memory architecture, Apple’s trying to point out that the M1’s approach is a bit different.
The biggest difference is that in the M1, the memory is a part of the M1 architecture itself. There’s no memory slot or slots on the motherboard of an M1 Mac, nor is there an area where a memory chip has been permanently soldered on. Instead, the memory is integrated into the same package that contains the M1 itself.
i tell people like my parents to get macs so they when they go wrong, they take them back to the apple store rather than back to me.
It seems insane that Apple still fit only 8Gb of memory to their machines, but the reality is that for almost all tasks that people use them for memory is obviously not the choke point on performance any more - with an SSD swap-to-disk is quick enough.
I'm on a 2013 bottom of the range iMac (with a fusion drive - so not even a true SSD). It definitely used to be the case 20+ years ago that every operating system upgrade would require more memory and a 3 year old windows machine would be next to useless. That just doesn't seem to be the case any longer.
Bottom of the range Macs with standard spec will be good for many many years of use. As will, I guess, a decent windows machine. The difference is you can still buy a lot of shitty cheap windows hardware thats painful to use even when new.