Tech Enthusiast

It's kinda not though? When you purchase the device, it becomes yours. Apple still retains certain rights yes, but controlling what software you can and cannot put on the device should not be one of them.
 
Dependence is freedom
Bad engineering is fashionable
shitty warranty is good customer service
Ignorance is ease of use
 
Only apple users.

"New breakthrough in battery tech",... again! And.... again! .... aaaaand again.
 
We have had like two dozen breakthroughs since we last changed what we use today, no? 😉

"New breakthrough in battery tech",... again! And.... again! .... aaaaand again.
 
We have had like two dozen breakthroughs since we last changed what we use today, no? 😉

As funny as it was meant to be:
This is actually the exact same thing big companies do,... while people pull out their torches.
 
People keep jumping on the hate train, when any company "uses their data". The holy data!
Rarely do people think about what the companies actually DO with said data.
 
Google improves the search engine. Which in turn works better for every user.
Hardware manufacturer improve their products by checking on how they are being used by the different user groups. Which in turn focuses the money on areas that are more important to the customer. Which in turn improves the product for every user.
They both ALSO get more money due to users enjoying their products more. Yes.
 
So, if LTT is harvesting the forum for Video ideas we get exactly the same situation:
We get better content, since it is based around our behavior. They get more money.
So how is that different to google, VPNs, NVidia, AMD, Intel,... or any other company for that matter?
 
I personally like companies "harvesting my data", since it leads to better products while I personally have zero downsides to it.
The products are slightly cheaper, slightly better and slightly more how I like them (unless I am using them way different then the masses).
 
If a company flat out claims to NOT do it, but actually does do it, I am upset due to the lying tho. That goes without saying.
Also, free Software,... give me a break. Nothing is free. People spend time and resources creating the stuff. Someone, somehow IS paying. This may not always be the end user, not always be the end users data,... but there is no free software.

Pretty sure THAT time is over.
At least germany stopped following US examples a while ago. Usually the EU follows germany and not the US anymore. 
Asia is following Chinas example for the most part.
 
Honestly, there is very little the US does that countries feel the need to copy anymore.
 
Apart maybe Russia,... they could learn a trick or two when it comes to staying in power and getting away with everything. 😉

So, unrelated, but I can't help myself:
 
If in California some 17 year olds are in a relation for 2 years, do the dirty every night and one of them turns 18,... do they suddenly have to stop and wait until the second also turns 18 in order to not get locked up or something?
That sounds a little crazy, no?
 
Then again: Laws on perfectly natural behavior seem to be more harsh than shooting other people in the face, so there is that.

As a BMW owner I can tell you:
There is no way this is gonna work without an issue or without people cracking it within 5 minutes.
 
BMW does outsource every piece of software. They barely have any IT personal themselves.
And if you own one, you notice that. The software is a hack piece. Every single part seems to be developed by another team and patched together with tape.
Nothing is working really well (tho, most stuff does work well enough).
 
If their security stuff would not rock so hard, I would sell the car right away. But right now, only Tesla and BMW seem to have a car that avoids accidents by itself. And I don't have a convenient way to recharge a car just yet, so I am kind of forced to keep the BMW.
As soon as Audi makes the same system (or Mercedes starts making non ugly cars), I will switch in a heartbeat.

kinda getting tired of companies bending over so easily for USA i have to admit

Don't jinx it!
I am afraid AF of that!

I am not sure you will get a GPU that can actually push 4k@120 with the next gen tho.
Sadly my 2080ti even gets as low as 70fps on some games with 1440p, let alone 4k. Sure, I could turn down some settings, but damn... id rather have the eye candy haha.

Same Old, same ol'.
 
Whenever a new console hits the market, they are optimized enough to "beat" a similarly priced PC, if you just factor in gaming and ignore all the other things a PC can do.
And about a year later, it breaks even,... then we get another 6-7 years of constant console bashing due to being bad value for the performance.
 
We all seen that, and we will all see it again (and again and again probably).
 
The good thing about a new console generation is usually that PCs are not bottle necked for a few years, which in turn pushes NVidia to make better GPUs for a while. 😉
Over the past years graphics have mostly been stagnant, due to games having to keep kind of parity with consoles,... so they made the PC graphics look just as bad.
 
So, just ignoring the usual console vs PC bashing,... as a PC gamer, I can finally look forward to getting prettier games for a while, so that makes me happy. Since I am using the PC for so many other tasks anyways, I won't ever exchange it for a console tho. But I may add a console either way, because,... well... why not. Just 500 bucks and you don't have to depend on PC Bluetooth and streaming for the couch experience for a while.

Im with you on that one.
Tiers are not dictated by an artificial price limit, but by what is available on the market.
 
A 1080 is no longer high-end, because even the lower end current gen GPUs offer similar performance.
And while a 1080 is enough for most 1080p gamers, it hardly makes 4k@60 viable, let alone with amazing settings. So no, it is not more than a mid tier GPU.

Same Old, same ol'.
 
Whenever a new console hits the market, they are optimized enough to "beat" a similarly priced PC, if you just factor in gaming and ignore all the other things a PC can do.
And about a year later, it breaks even,... then we get another 6-7 years of constant console bashing due to being bad value for the performance.
 
We all seen that, and we will all see it again (and again and again probably).
 
The good thing about a new console generation is usually that PCs are not bottle necked for a few years, which in turn pushes NVidia to make better GPUs for a while. 😉
Over the past years graphics have mostly been stagnant, due to games having to keep kind of parity with consoles,... so they made the PC graphics look just as bad.
 
So, just ignoring the usual console vs PC bashing,... as a PC gamer, I can finally look forward to getting prettier games for a while, so that makes me happy. Since I am using the PC for so many other tasks anyways, I won't ever exchange it for a console tho. But I may add a console either way, because,... well... why not. Just 500 bucks and you don't have to depend on PC Bluetooth and streaming for the couch experience for a while.

Same Old, same ol'.
 
Whenever a new console hits the market, they are optimized enough to "beat" a similarly priced PC, if you just factor in gaming and ignore all the other things a PC can do.
And about a year later, it breaks even,... then we get another 6-7 years of constant console bashing due to being bad value for the performance.
 
We all seen that, and we will all see it again (and again and again probably).
 
The good thing about a new console generation is usually that PCs are not bottle necked for a few years, which in turn pushes NVidia to make better GPUs for a while. 😉
Over the past years graphics have mostly been stagnant, due to games having to keep kind of parity with consoles,... so they made the PC graphics look just as bad.
 
So, just ignoring the usual console vs PC bashing,... as a PC gamer, I can finally look forward to getting prettier games for a while, so that makes me happy. Since I am using the PC for so many other tasks anyways, I won't ever exchange it for a console tho. But I may add a console either way, because,... well... why not. Just 500 bucks and you don't have to depend on PC Bluetooth and streaming for the couch experience for a while.

Not a huge deal in my book.
Never understood why people insist on buying new CPUs and use them on Boards that were not designed to use all the fancy features to their full potential.
AM4 has been here forever. Just move on to AM5 or whatever.
 
The more time they need to spend supporting old stuff, the less time they spend on making the new stuff amazing. Id rather see AMD crush Intel some more and beat them a little more, while Intel is on the ground and helpless. When (not a matter of "if" in my book) Intel returns to the competitive market, AMD better have a solid market share and following.

Not a huge deal in my book.
Never understood why people insist on buying new CPUs and use them on Boards that were not designed to use all the fancy features to their full potential.
AM4 has been here forever. Just move on to AM5 or whatever.
 
The more time they need to spend supporting old stuff, the less time they spend on making the new stuff amazing. Id rather see AMD crush Intel some more and beat them a little more, while Intel is on the ground and helpless. When (not a matter of "if" in my book) Intel returns to the competitive market, AMD better have a solid market share and following.

Not a huge deal in my book.
Never understood why people insist on buying new CPUs and use them on Boards that were not designed to use all the fancy features to their full potential.
AM4 has been here forever. Just move on to AM5 or whatever.
 
The more time they need to spend supporting old stuff, the less time they spend on making the new stuff amazing. Id rather see AMD crush Intel some more and beat them a little more, while Intel is on the ground and helpless. When (not a matter of "if" in my book) Intel returns to the competitive market, AMD better have a solid market share and following.

I went the same tune, but was to lazy to write it all up,... since honestly it is hard to argue with apple marketing. They say it is great, people think it is mandatory and the future. Just how it works sadly.
Amazing write up, thank you.
 
The bottom line for me is:
USB3 will not bottleneck even "those" use-cases AND the laptop in question would melt after seconds, if the workflow would actually go full blast on the bandwidth.

That sounds like something you could do easily over 5Gbps USB.
The only thing that might be slightly bottlenecked is your external storage, but assuming a typical scenario that should be on a network device anyway, not directly plugged in to your computer.
 
I doubt even your example actually would get bottlenecked by USB-C, and if it does it's probably for very short periods of time. Or in an absolute worst case scenario, you could connect the external storage to another USB ports and use two ports instead of one. Shouldn't be too much trouble, right? And I think it would be well worth it if it meant saving a couple of hundred dollars.
 
I don't think it's a lack of knowledge that is holding Thunderbolt back. I think it's price and a lack of need for most people. Why spend hundreds of dollars more on something that might be technically superior, but is completely wasted? Yeah it can transfer at 40Gbps, that's great. But most people doesn't even need 2Gbps. So why spend more when USB is already over twice as fast as they need?
 
 
Well, corporate settings is where the vast majority of docks are used. That's why I brought it up.
2.5Gbps and 5Gbps is even more rare than Thunderbolt. I get that you want to use 2.5Gbps as an argument for why USB C is limiting but the fact of the matter is that barely anyone uses 2.5Gbps or 5Gbps, so it's kind of irrelevant. If you want high speed networking access, get 10Gbps. The ones that do already have (or at least should have). But I don't see the need for such high speed networking on a laptop. If you're going to for example work with large files that require so much bandwidth, shouldn't you do that on a desktop? I mean, the network won't be your bottleneck in that scenario. The laptop will be.
Also, pretty sure USB C docks has enough headroom to do 2.5Gbps.
 
And by the time 2.5Gbps and 5Gbps is mature then we will be on USB 4 already. So it will be a non-issue. If you think you're "future proofing" your laptop by getting one with Thunderbolt you're sadly mistaken. Thunderbolt will die out in favor of USB 4, just like USB 3 will die out in favor of USB 4. It doesn't make sense to try and future proof by buying a dying standard when both USB 3 and USB 4 will be replaced by the same thing in the future.
 
 
 
The difference is that while most people don't need an i7, they still benefit from it being there. Processing is faster if your processor is faster.
If you don't use Thunderbolt (which most people don't) it is completely wasted by being there. You don't benefit from Thunderbolt unless you actually use Thunderbolt. You benefit from an i7 even though you could make do with an i5.
That's where your analogy completely breaks down.
 
Yes, Thunderbolt is common in high end laptops today. And yet, barely anyone uses it. That should tell you something. That it's kind of a pointless feature except for an extremely small minority of people (out of which most are Apple users).
 
 
 
AMD devices can have Thunderbolt so I don't think "they used AMD" is the reason why they skipped Thunderbolt.
Like you said, I think they skipped it because they wanted to get some higher margins on their devices. But since barely anyone uses it they weren't afraid of losing sales by skipping it. Why spend money on a feature that is useless to 99.99% of your potential customers?
And yeah, I totally agree that the AMD chip in their notebook was crap compared to the Intel one. I don't think that's very relevant to this conversation though.
 
 
 
Yes but people like you are in an extreme minority and when you are you can't expect companies to always support your workflow when designing their devices.
But even with your setup I really don't think you would be limited with a USB C dock. Tell me again what you had connected.
1) Gigabit Ethernet - Uses up to 1Gbps but usually way less. It doesn't seem like you have a NAS so you should be limited to your Internet connection in most cases. So maybe 100Mbps? 200Mbps? Let's say a 500Mbps connection just so that you don't get mad at me for underestimating
2) External storage - Depends on what storage you got but let's say it peaks at 2Gbps. That's 250Mbps sequential speeds. That's twice as fast as my high performance 7200 HDD. Unless you got a RAID enclosure or use SSDs, your hard drives will rarely even reach 2Gbps of speed.
3) SDCard for RPi - If you got a really high end microSD it probably has U3 speeds, which is 60MBps write speed. So that's 0.5Gbps.
4) USB drives - Low speed stuff. Doesn't use up much. Let's say 0.5Gbps? That's a pretty high end USB memory stick, or several regular sticks.
 
A) Display - Doesn't eat into the bandwidth unless you got some crazy monitor setup like multiple 4K monitors.
B) Power - Doesn't eat up bandwidth either.
 
 
So even if you got everything plugged in all at once, and also happen to push all those things all at once, you will only use 0.5 + 2 + 0.5 + 0.5 = 4.7Gbps.
And that's if you are using EVERYTHING you listed all at once. I just don't buy into the idea that you need more than what USB C would provide. And that's with you as an example, which is what I would consider the niche group of users who got a bunch of high speed stuff connected to your dock. Most people don't even come close to this.

I'm not sure I agree there; this use case sounds fairly out there. Most people and clients I've encountered use a dedicated desktop for home use (even those that use laptops extensively when not home), and for those that eschew a desktop, are using fairly standard laptops and use their ethernet for NAS devices at home for most transfers, and SSD via 3.1 for most other scenarios, for those that don't do heavy ingestion.

I've actually helped a few digital professionals and some small businesses alter some work flows because they were drowning in peripheral and dongle overload. It was easier and more cost-effective to upgrade their mobile units to larger capacity internal storage, and for others, upgrading to newer units with ethernet and ditching the majority of their removable media.
 
Personally, I don't think I'd ever choose a device that forces me to increase my peripherals for equal functionality, especially when there are viable options with standard I/O that rival the thinness and lightness of "the best."

So a machine that can't even run all those things at once is used to show a use case that "the other" tech is limited? Kind of funny actually.
You are acting like people saturate 10gbit connections, just because one USB3 could in theory do that. You seem to totally ignore that you usually run far below those saturated connections. Especially with the stuff you mention that all needs connecting.
 
You could do all you currently do on every USB3 as well, without noticing a difference. Apart maybe from data transfer to that external storage, if it has TB as well.
 
Also: If that is the future, count me out. Ill stick with the past in that case. Going backwards at full speed should not be the future, no matter how hard apple marketing claims it to be. Why would anyone even consider that setup, with all the drawbacks on every front, INCLUDING price?

Me thinks someone is so enraged and infuriated by the thought of not having thunderbolt, they have have forgotten how to read.

So a machine that can't even run all those things at once is used to show a use case that "the other" tech is limited? Kind of funny actually.
You are acting like people saturate 10gbit connections, just because one USB3 could in theory do that. You seem to totally ignore that you usually run far below those saturated connections. Especially with the stuff you mention that all needs connecting.
 
You could do all you currently do on every USB3 as well, without noticing a difference. Apart maybe from data transfer to that external storage, if it has TB as well.
 
Also: If that is the future, count me out. Ill stick with the past in that case. Going backwards at full speed should not be the future, no matter how hard apple marketing claims it to be. Why would anyone even consider that setup, with all the drawbacks on every front, INCLUDING price?

So a machine that can't even run all those things at once is used to show a use case that "the other" tech is limited? Kind of funny actually.
You are acting like people saturate 10gbit connections, just because one USB3 could in theory do that. You seem to totally ignore that you usually run far below those saturated connections. Especially with the stuff you mention that all needs connecting.
 
You could do all you currently do on every USB3 as well, without noticing a difference. Apart maybe from data transfer to that external storage, if it has TB as well.
 
Also: If that is the future, count me out. Ill stick with the past in that case. Going backwards at full speed should not be the future, no matter how hard apple marketing claims it to be. Why would anyone even consider that setup, with all the drawbacks on every front, INCLUDING price?

To make use of TB, the connected devices also need TB licensing.
This usually doubles the price, 50% if you are lucky.
 
I just don't get why everyone should pay all the extra money, for something very few people actually use.
It's not like a common laptop with TB would have the raw power to even saturate all that stuff at once. Let alone finding a use case that does indeed saturate enough stuff at once to bottleneck USB3.
 
We are really talking constructed use cases here to make TB sound useful.
Again: It is an amazing thing to have and does work amazingly well for what it is. Just like a 2000 horse power car is amazing for what it is, yet very few people would actually see the benefit, while everyone will see the added fuel cost.
 
If and once TB comes without drawbacks and extra cost, I will be the first to happily use it or even search for it on my devices. Until then, I am fine with "only" using the 1000 horse power car for my groceries shopping. That saved fuel will get my cats a few extra snacks!