October 18th Apple Event - Unleashed - Apple Silicon, MacBook Pro upgrades, HomePod mini, AirPods 3rd Generation

[leadeater]

42 minutes ago, saltycaramel said:

Wonder if it will also have two gigabit NICs (one for the gigabit port on the Mini and one for the gigabit port on the power brick) or if it won’t support that brick with ethernet. Keep in mind that the ethernet power brick on the M1 iMac is just an extension cord for the ethernet pins, the actual NIC is inside the machine. 

Mac Mini will should 10Gb support, well it already does now but an updated one will. Probably be different versions of the power adapter to accommodate cost choice if you want 10Gb or not. Although who knows, Apple might also adopt 2.5Gb or 5Gb. Seems like a good middle ground compromise to me if they standardize on 2.5Gb/5Gb and reserve 10Gb and higher for the Mac Pro.

 

Eventually everything will get 2.5Gb support or better anyway just a case of when, it's surprisingly common or more reasonable high end motherboard but not crazy ones so I'd say any year now Apple will adopt that.

[saltycaramel]

I hope every ethernet port under the sun becomes a 2.5G. My home network is already in the process of getting ready for that future. (thanks to the recent abundance of cheapish fanless 2.5G switches with 10G upstream)

 

But I’m afraid Apple could gatekeep above-1G for years still to make the multiGig 10G/5G/2.5G CTO upsell more enticing.

[Lightwreather]

23 minutes ago, saltycaramel said:

I hope every ethernet port under the sun becomes a 2.5G.

I see this happening only after the year 2077

[hishnash]

35 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Seems like a good middle ground compromise to me if they standardize on 2.5Gb/5Gb and reserve 10Gb and higher for the Mac Pro.

given that the current mini supports 10G (if you pay extra for it) I would expect apple will keep that as an option.

 

 

24 minutes ago, saltycaramel said:

But I’m afraid Apple could gatekeep above-1G for years still to make the multiGig 10G/5G/2.5G CTO upsell more enticing.

I expect they will keep the entry level at 1G but if they split the mini product line to have one with M1 and one with M1 pro/max I could see the higher end `pro` always coming with 10G (like the iMac Pro and macPro). 

[leadeater]

4 hours ago, hishnash said:

I expect they will keep the entry level at 1G but if they split the mini product line to have one with M1 and one with M1 pro/max I could see the higher end `pro` always coming with 10G (like the iMac Pro and macPro). 

It will get to the point that you can only buy multi-gig network processing chips so you'd have to intentionally restrict to1Gb or intentionally not include support for it inside the SoC. We are talking about an EXTREMELY basic thing to implement if it's part of the SoC, do or not do.

 

Who knows, I think the external power supply and how they connect it to the system will dictate this the most.

[saltycaramel]

 

Oh yeah.

I remember feeling weird after watching the second video, felt more like a Zephyrus M16 ad.

 

Also that closing statement by Anthony about “purpose-built hardware that eventually becomes dead weight” sounds straight out of those M1-deniers PC-bois threads…yes there are some purpose-built fixed-function engines for video editing workflows but there’s also a ton of raw unadulterated CPU power and GPU power in there, all wrapped in an out-of-this-word-ly efficient/cool/unplugged package in terms of performance-per-watt…no chance of these laptops becoming a “dead weight when consumers move on” anytime sooner than the current crop of x86 laptops, if anything it’s the x86 laptops right now that look like power-hungry door stops that need to be plugged in at all times, in comparison, if we really wanna go there. Not sure about who wrote the script for this particular video but it looked like Anthony (whose good faith I have zero doubt about) was constrained by the editorial needs to drive home a certain message.

[HenrySalayne]

3 hours ago, saltycaramel said:

Oh yeah.

I remember feeling weird after watching the second video, felt more like a Zephyrus M16 ad.

Could it be that some people are especially butt hurt when their holy grail is not portrayed as they would like it to be?

Might some people struggle with the terms "cherry picking" and "real world tasks"?

I would say "yes"!

 

Complaining that LTT didn't include a lot of well optimized software while other reviewers included only well optimized software and calling it "cherry picking" is rather ironic. After all, we need different opinions and approaches to get the full picture. Anthony's review might stand out from other reviews for covering the other side of the coin, but that is exactly why we need reviews like this.

And just imagine somebody would make a video saying "this person is wrong about Intel" and then complaining about "they didn't cover software optimized for AVX512". This seems stupid but it's kind of what's happening here.

[Laborant]

As with news-sites, newspapers and TV-Channels: Always watch Youtube different channels to get the "whole picture".
 

If I'd need a notebook, currently I would probably buy a MacBook, and I would have probably stumbled over some things LTT has shown. On the other hand, LTT is generally poor when it comes to covering computer engineering related programs and workflows, but there are different Youtubers covering that (which is fine).

 

MaxTech is not bad, but they limit their coverage heavily to workflows that are well optimised to M1. The graphics horsepower of M1 Pro/Max to me also ask for "gaming", as this was traditionally the driver of GPU development. (General Purpose Compute, Crypto and ML came later to the table), so testing popular games is only fair. (But also including optimized ones, LTT admitted they forgot)

[leadeater]

37 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

Could it be that some people are especially butt hurt when their holy grail is not portrayed as they would like it to be?

Might some people struggle with the terms "cherry picking" and "real world tasks"?

I would say "yes"!

Honestly I don't like some of the criticism thrown out in the above linked video, some of it is valid for sure however the comments made make it rather clear the video was not watched all that well by the host of the video.

 

Take the CG:GO graph, LTT made it clear in their video they all were performing the same as it was CPU limited and also performance limited by the x86 translation layer. When all 3 have the exact same CPU performance cores and the software does not scale across more of them then it's not an error if the CPU performance is the same, go figure  

 

Why would you "not include" the CS:GO graph/data when it is in fact functioning exactly as it should under those conditions and any user would experience exactly the same. He has a point for Handbrake but not for CS:GO, however if anyone goes to watch the video again the Handbrake test has been edited out aka retracted (or I just cannot find it).

 

A fair and balanced review is showing the good and the bad, on battery performance should have been included for sure. There's is only so many M1 stroking reviews we really need all running the exact same stuff gushing over it, that's only so useful to those exclusively doing that. Fair is fair a lot will be doing that but you need to test other things and actually show it not hide behind "it's not optimized yet" and not show it, doesn't help anyone.

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Fair is fair a lot will be doing that but you need to test other things and actually show it not hide behind "it's not optimized yet" and not show it, doesn't help anyone.

 

This is the single biggest annoyance for me with reviewers and discussions,  It's the same people who shit on new technology (from brand A) not being perfect on launch that defend a crap product proudly claiming there are "optimizations" coming and the product (from brand B) really is good believe me I am internet porn hero. 

 

 

[leadeater]

5 minutes ago, mr moose said:

This is the single biggest annoyance for me with reviewers and discussions,  It's the same people who shit on new technology (from brand A) not being perfect on launch that defend a crap product proudly claiming there are "optimizations" coming and the product (from brand B) really is good believe me I am internet porn hero. 

Well if it's clear that there is a high likelihood that optimization for the software is coming within 3 months then it's fair to raise that concern, however if it's not coming in that time frame then just accept that's how any buyer is going to experience it. Even then for something like Blender 3.1 adding Metal support that has to be stated but also an indication of when, because that at the time and still isn't a "soon^TM" yet.

 

So a bit of critical thinking has to be applied along with the purpose of reviews, to inform potential buyers. They are not to reinforce opinions of products and how good you think they are or are not.

[HenrySalayne]

8 hours ago, leadeater said:

Well if it's clear that there is a high likelihood that optimization for the software is coming within 3 months then it's fair to raise that concern, however if it's not coming in that time frame then just accept that's how any buyer is going to experience it. Even then for something like Blender 3.1 adding Metal support that has to be stated but also an indication of when, because that at the time and still isn't a "soon^TM" yet.

Even if some optimizations are on the horizon - they might just be a negligible update. Imagine a reviewer would have called the RTX 20 series a "leap for mankind" just because Nvidia claimed their newest piece of hardware could do real time raytracing in the future. It would have been quite disappointing. The same is true for Apple: if they include diagrams in their promotional material claiming "it is just as fast as a 3080" and it does this only in a few selected tasks, people should know about it without the caveat that there might be more software support in the future. The review will be outdated eventually, but it will at least present the factual state of the product at the time of making and not promising things that could never happen.

 

[mr moose]

13 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

The same is true for Apple: if they include diagrams in their promotional material claiming "it is just as fast as a 3080" and it does this only in a few selected tasks,

 

 

They did what every other tech company has done, they pulled the oldest marketing stunt in the book and the usual crowds become hypocritical defending it because this time is was apple and not Intel/Nvidia. 

[saltycaramel]

15 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

Even if some optimizations are on the horizon -

 

Calling them “optimizations” is a misrepresentation.

 

IF its power is harnessed properly (e.g. native ARM app using Metal), the GPU in the M1 Max can be as fast as a lowish TDP mobile 3080. 

 

But no “IF”s will ever make a 3050 Ti in an x86 laptop become as powerful as a 3080 Ti. 

 

Hence it’s not fair to compare the Max to a 3050.

 

Also LMG

spends 30k$ in Apple laptops to get all the SKUs

still pits the 14” MBP against the 16” Zephyrus, instead of the far better cooled 16” MBP

??????
profit

 

Totally logical and fair. 

[suicidalfranco]

5 minutes ago, saltycaramel said:

 

Calling them “optimizations” is a misrepresentation.

 

IF its power is harnessed properly (e.g. native ARM app using Metal), the GPU in the M1 Max can be as fast as a lowish TDP mobile 3080. 

 

But no “IF”s will ever make a 3050 Ti in an x86 laptop become as powerful as a 3080 Ti. 

 

Hence it’s not fair to compare the Max to a 3050.

 

Also LMG

spends 30k$ in Apple laptops to get all the SKUs

still pits the 14” MBP against the 16” Zephyrus, instead of the far better cooled 16” MBP

??????
profit

 

Totally logical and fair. 

Cope

[saltycaramel]

7 minutes ago, suicidalfranco said:

Cope

I’m coping so hard with my 16” M1 Pro 32GB. 

 

It’s just a bit chilly on the lap in these cold winter days, I’m thinking of sandwiching an x86 laptop between my thighs and the Macbook, just to keep me warm, an Intel laptop with an nvidia GPU should do the trick. 

[HenrySalayne]

1 hour ago, saltycaramel said:

Calling them “optimizations” is a misrepresentation.

No, it's not.

1 hour ago, saltycaramel said:

IF its power is harnessed properly (e.g. native ARM app using Metal), the GPU in the M1 Max can be as fast as a lowish TDP mobile 3080. 

If the 11900k AVX512 power is harnessed properly it is way faster than a 5950x!

1 hour ago, saltycaramel said:

Hence it’s not fair to compare the Max to a 3050.

I don't think it was fair as well. On paper the poor 3050 had no chance to compete, yet, it was quite close. Poor little thing forced to fight above its weight class.

1 hour ago, saltycaramel said:

I’m coping so hard with my 16” M1 Pro 32GB. 

Yet, you still feel the urge to complain about a review that doesn't reinforce your opinion? Because you need reviewers to tell you what an awesome buying decision you made?

[suicidalfranco]

1 hour ago, saltycaramel said:

I’m coping so hard with my 16” M1 Pro 32GB. 

 

It’s just a bit chilly on the lap in these cold winter days, I’m thinking of sandwiching an x86 laptop between my thighs and the Macbook, just to keep me warm, an Intel laptop with an nvidia GPU should do the trick. 

And yet here you are crying about Anthony hurting your mac's fee fees

[HRD]

7 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

Yet, you still feel the urge to complain about a review that doesn't reinforce your opinion? Because you need reviewers to tell you what an awesome buying decision you made?

the problem is their review focus on the negatives and non-optimized workloads. it is completely fine to mention them. in fact, I think it is awesome to let people know about the limits of the device. However, ignoring the optimized workloads and games made it an unhonest review.

[leadeater]

14 minutes ago, HRD said:

the problem is their review focus on the negatives and non-optimized workloads. it is completely fine to mention them. in fact, I think it is awesome to let people know about the limits of the device. However, ignoring the optimized workloads and games made it an unhonest review.

They had plenty of Apple native applications and native compiled applications, remember the review is way after release and there is an existing wealth of information. You don't need an LLT review to tell you all the things that's been said 100 times already weeks ago. Do you really want to slap down reviews that actually try to be different and cover areas not done? Or cater to their audience. I think more people that watch LTT care about games than Final Cut Pro, could be wrong but I doubt it.

[HRD]

13 minutes ago, leadeater said:

They had plenty of Apple native applications and native compiled applications, remember the review is way after release and there is an existing wealth of information. You don't need an LLT review to tell you all the things that's been said 100 times already weeks ago. Do you really want to slap down reviews that actually try to be different and cover areas not done? Or cater to their audience. I think more people that watch LTT care about games than Final Cut Pro, could be wrong but I doubt it.

because the review is way after release it should cover everything. the only windows laptop in the review is a 16 laptop. I am not against including it for context but it should not be the only one against the 14-inch MacBook. the second apple made a big deal about performance on battery. these are laptops and I think performance on the battery is more important than performance plugged in. It would be better to include both but if you gonna include one, it should be the performance while unplugged. it is fair to include non-native games to show the performance under emulation for the people who are interested. However, not including native games and saying it is like 3050 ti. ok say that but say while the 3050 ti running natively and the m1 max running the game under emulation. and show us the performance while both games running natively like WoW or Baldur's Gate 3. they said they forgot to review a native game with the m1 pro 14 inch which by itself questionable decision since the review was already late and delaying it an extra day to include them is possible. and after 3 weeks of that review, the m1 max review comes without including native games. 

[Imbadatnames]

2 minutes ago, HRD said:

because the review is way after release it should cover everything. the only windows laptop in the review is a 16 laptop. I am not against including it for context but it should not be the only one against the 14-inch MacBook. the second apple made a big deal about performance on battery. these are laptops and I think performance on the battery is more important than performance plugged in. It would be better to include both but if you gonna include one, it should be the performance while unplugged. it is fair to include non-native games to show the performance under emulation for the people who are interested. However, not including native games and saying it is like 3050 ti. ok say that but say while the 3050 ti running natively and the m1 max running the game under emulation. and show us the performance while both games running natively like WoW or Baldur's Gate 3. they said they forgot to review a native game with the m1 pro 14 inch which by itself questionable decision since the review was already late and delaying it an extra day to include them is possible. and after 3 weeks of that review, the m1 max review comes without including native games. 

Tbh every laptop review should be on battery only 

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, Imbadatnames said:

Tbh every laptop review should be on battery only 

Should be both, not only battery. On power performance is still important, there's no reason to run your laptop on battery if you don't need or have to and knowing that performance can be equally important, purpose of purchase is an important factor and not everyone will use it the same.

[HRD]

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Should be both, not only battery. On power performance is still important, there's no reason to run your laptop on battery if you don't need or have to and knowing that performance can be equally important, purpose of purchase is an important factor and not everyone will use it the same.

as I said it is better to include both but if you gonna only include one it should be on battery.

[Imbadatnames]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

Should be both, not only battery. On power performance is still important, there's no reason to run your laptop on battery if you don't need or have to and knowing that performance can be equally important, purpose of purchase is an important factor and not everyone will use it the same.

The selling point is battery though and a lot of manufactures like to use 200+W for the performance figures off the wall and then use 20W low power mode with 10% screen brightness for the battery life. Ultimately a lot of the more powerful laptops aren’t laptops at all they’re a workstation with a screen built in because you can’t actually do work on them for more than an hour on battery.