I mean, it almost certainly is? I would guess a majority of the low-end SKUs are rarely if ever attached to one external display. Two would be rarer still.
Some of them were trying out Apple Silicon replacements, though I'm not aware of what they did monitor wise. Probably used the excuse to buy a single large ultrawide each instead, though I don't actually know. ;)
Honestly, I'm an accountant and everyone in my office uses 2-3 monitors with $1,200 business ultrabook.
MacBook Air is a world-leading form factor for travel, it's not "low-end".
MBA with extra storage/RAM can exceed revenue of base MBP.
The travel form factor of MBA is not available for MBP, for any price.
Heh, that's not how I would describe MacBook Pros. ;)
you're saying they're low-end because Intel? if you've got your macbook connected to two monitors, you're not very concerned about battery performance.
So isn't Intel silicon competitive speedwise? I thought the M[0-4]s were OK but sort of hypey as to being better in all regards.
And even if you do not care about battery, you still care about throttling.
Real world, the M series chips are by far the best I’ve ever used as a software engineer and it’s not even close.
I’d seriously consider not taking a job if they were still on Intel MacBooks. I appreciate that an arch switch isn’t a piece of cake for many many workloads, and it isn’t just a sign of employers cheaping out. But for me it’s just been such a significant improvement.
But with the general power of the base model Apple Silicon I don't think most dev shops really need the higher end models, honestly.
What dev shop immediately buys all developers the newest and shiniest thing as soon as its released without trialing it first?
At least at the time, things worked a bit easier having the entire pipeline (dev -> prod) use a single architecture.
(Overall the transition was super smooth, but it wasn't instant or without bumps)
If the company bought Pro or Max chips and not base models, it wouldn’t be a problem.
I can pick areas where Apple is beating Intel. Different products have different feature matrices, news at 11.
It does seem like a shame, though—Intel’s IOT department seems to try lots of things, but not get many hits.
Almost always it’s maximizing profit margins rather than anything else.
they operate 100% on profitability, not what's technically feasible. They are extremely focused on making money. Yes, there is a reason after all.
I recently went on a 5-day trip and forgot to bring the charger for my M2. The first day I thought I'd have to rush around and find one. By the fourth day I still had 8% and then finally realized I could charge it via USB-C instead of magsafe.
Just 2 would be enough. Which seems like a basic feature their competitors are are capable of supporting for a very low costs.
They in fact are competing on checkboxes, specifically they are probably using this limitation to upsell theirs more expensive models.