For $800 the M4 Air just seems like one of the best tech deals around.
This really sucks. The nice thing about high end (Mx Pro/Max) MBPs is that if you need desktop-like power, it's there, but they can also do a pretty good job pretending to be MacBook Airs and stretch that 100Wh battery far further than is possible with similarly powerful x86 laptops.
This affects ultraportables too, though. A MacBook Air performs well in bursts and only becomes limited in sustained tasks, but competing laptops don't even do burst very well and still need active cooling to boot.
On the desktop front I think AMD has been killing it but both companies need to start from scratch for laptops.
IMO Apple is killing it with the mac mini too. Obviously not if you're gaming (that has a lot to do with the OS though), but if you're OK with the OS, it's a powerhouse for the size, noise, and energy required.
You can hear the fan at full load, especially on the M4 Pro. I really wish Apple went with a larger case and fan for that chip, which would allow quieter cooling.
Also, many units are affected by idle (power supply) buzzing: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/255853533?sortBy=rank
The Mac Mini is quieter than a typical PC, but it's not literally silent like, say, a smartphone.
My Mac Mini M2 never does any noise, even when I run FFMpeg the fans don’t spike. It just gets slightly warmer. Still, unless I’m doing these high CPU bound activities, every time I touch it it’s cold as if it was turned off, which is very different than my previous Intel one that was always either warm or super hot.
Same here. I actually don't care for macOS much, and I'm one of those weirdos who actually likes Windows (with WSL).
I tried the surface laptop 7 with the snapdragon X elite, and it's..OK. Still spins up the fans quite a bit and runs hotter than my 14" M4 Pro. It's noticeably slower than the MacBook too, and isn't instant wake from sleep (though it's a lot better than Wintel laptops used to be).
So I've been on Apple Silicon macs for the last 4.5 years because there's just no other option out there that even comes close. I'm actually away from my desk a lot, battery life matters to me. I just want a laptop with great performance AND great battery life, silent, runs cool, high quality screen and touchpad, and decent speakers and microphone.
MacBooks are literally the only computer on the market that checks all boxes. Even if I wanted to/preferred to run Windows or Linux instead, I can't because there just isn't equivalent hardware out there.
I recently tried VirtualBox and it’s finally catching up, seems to work without any problems but I didn’t test it enough to find out the quirks.
* https://blogs.vmware.com/cloud-foundation/2024/11/11/vmware-...
You need to register an account/e-mail address for a free account:
* https://knowledge.broadcom.com/external/article?articleNumbe...
After which you can download VMware Fusion Pro and/or VMware Workstation Pro:
* https://knowledge.broadcom.com/external/article/368667/downl...
This seems to be a perpetual licence (?), so as long as it can run on the underlying OS you can continue to use it. Not sure if there's any 'phone home' functionality to track things (like has been seen with Oracle VirtualBox).
It may be the software problem as well. On Windows I regularly need to find which new app started to eat battery like crazy. Usually it ends up being something third-party related to hardware, like Alienware app constantly making WMI requests (high CPU usage of svchost.exe hosting a WMI provider, disabling Alienware service helped), Intel Killer Wi-Fi software doing something when I did not even know it was installed on my PC (disabling all related services helped), Dell apps doing something, MSI apps doing something... you get the idea.
It seems like a class of problems which you simply can't have on macOS because of closed ecosystem.
Without all this stuff my Intel 155H works pretty decently, although I'm sure it is far away from M-series in terms of performance.
Because the OS and apps running on it were already taking advantage of multithreading, making them efficiency core friendly was easy since devs only had to mark already-encapsulated tasks as eligible for running on efficiency cores, so adoption was quick and deep.
Meanwhile on Windows there are still piles of programs that have yet to enter the Core 2 Duo era, let alone advance any further.
Earlier. I did some multiprocessing work on an SMP PowerPC Mac in 1997.
Of course, but I assume you don't really need to install third-party apps to control hardware. In my case Alienware and Dell bloat came from me setting up an Alienware monitor. MSI bloat came from setting up MSI GPU. Intel Killer stuff just got automatically installed by Windows Update, it seems.
> Microsoft Defender
This one I immediately disable after Windows installation so no problems here :)
On work we get CrowdStrike Falcon, it seems pretty tame for now. Guess it depends on IT-controlled scan settings though.
1. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/defender-endpoint/mac-supp...
It's definitely becoming less easy over time. First you had to click approve in a dialog box, then you had to right-click -> open -> approve, now you have to attempt (and fail) to run the app -> then go into System Settings -> Security -> Approve.
I wanted to install a 3rd party kernel extension recently, and I had to reboot into the safety partition, and disable some portion of system integrity protection.
I don't think we're all that far from MacOS being as locked-down as iOS on the software installation front...
Microsoft is working towards this too. They wish so bad that they were Apple.
No wonder the Ferrari of computers if more efficient and effective than hobbled together junk yard monstrosity... ok, I'll be more generous... the Chrysler of computers.
I don't want to suggest that Apple is ideal with its soldered constrictions, or that modularity should be done away with, but reality is that it seems to me that standards need to be tightened down A LOT if the PC market really wants to compete. I for one have no problem not dealing with all the hassle of non-Apple products because I can afford it. If Apple got its botoxed, manicured head out of their rear ends and started offering their products at competitive prices, they would likely totally dominate the majority of computing market, which would likely atrophy and effectively die out over time.
Let's hope that Apple remains pretentious and sturdy greedy so that at least we have choice and it gives the PC sector at least a chance to get their standards in order, maybe even funding a gold standard functional linux distro that could at least hold water to MacOS without drooling all over itself.
Don't get me wrong, I really admire what apple has done with the M CPUs, but I personally prefer the freedom of being able to install linux, bsd, windows, and even weirder OSes like Haiku.
No.
Even if it was better than lima (and the builtin posix/unix environment), which: it ain’t, it doesn’t nearly make a dent in the mandatory online account, copilot shit and all the rest.
If you like Windows, you’ll find it better with WSL2. In fact, I see many developers at my org who claim they’ll switch to Windows (from Mac) when we make it available internally.
However, if you love Mac, you'll never find Windows palpable no matter what.
And then there’s all shades of gray.
As long as you're ok being tethered to the wall, and even then, guzzling power.
The whole point of Apple Silicon is that its performance is exactly the same on battery as tethered to the wall AND it delivers that performance with unmatched power efficiency.
Its the same on pure desktop. Look at the performance per watt of the Mac Mini. Its just nuts how power efficient it is. Most people's monitors will use more power than the Mac Mini.
It'd be tempting if I had any idea what the software compatibility story would be like. For example, the company I'm contracting with now requires a device monitor for SOC2 compliance (ensuring OS patches are applied and hard drive encryption remains on). They don't even want to do it, but their customers won't work with them without it.
Surprise surprise, a quick check of the device monitor company's website shows they don't support ARM architecture devices at all.
I have the surface laptop 7 with the X elite in it. The only thing I've ran into that outright didn't run was MSSQL server.
It's not my main machine, that is still an M4 Macbook pro but I hop on it occasionally to keep up with what Windows is doing or if I need to help someone with something windows specific. I've got WSL2, Docker, VSCode, etc. all running just fine.
It's decent, but not amazing. Feels a little slower than my M2 Air I have but not much, most of that is probably just windows being windows.
Would be nice to be able to get Linux running on one of these
I wish Microsoft put more pressure on vendors to support ARM.
Which left me bitter quite honestly as I was looking forward to them a lot.
I wouldn’t be opposed to going back to Linux. But once you stop looking for power sockets all the time and start treating your laptop like a device you can just use all day at any moment, it’s hard to go back.
You really think an average person shopping for a computer at Bestbuy cares about installing a different OS on their machine?
I certainly don't think that matters to the vast majority of the population
Sorry, I don't get the reference. What sort of expenses are you referring to? For the price of a used car you can get pretty much any workstation money can buy.
There are certainly many more options on the PC side, but it's not because Apple actively blocks users from running another OS.
Once that’s done, any distro should be able to work.
From replacement parts and physical endurance perspective, I mean.
For a work machine, that’s pretty easy to justify.
Ignoring that though, if work machine means an Excel machine, then it's probably overspending IMO. If work machine means workstation, then you'd probably rather want one of the >1.6k models with more working memory… or just don't go Apple.
Probably need to get the batteries replaced somewhere past the 5 year mark, but otherwise the durability is unmatched.
A few months ago Spotify on an ancient Intel Mac mini in the living room started complaining that the new version of Spotify is no longer compatible with that Mac. Then I ran Open Core and updated the MacOS to a much newer version, and Spotify is happy. Now I’ll get even more years out of that machine.
Cheapest, I found was about 1000€. Buying a one-off offer from some random webshop, means you would have to deal with them in case of repairs or warranty issues.
And yeah, effectively max. 200GB non-upgradable SSD storage, certainly makes cheap offers likely, cause that's borderline unusable for almost everyone, who needs more than a web browser.
Only if you don't mind macOS.
Still better than all the alternatives for someone like me that has to straddle clients expecting MS Office, gives me a *nix out of the box, and can run logic, reaper , MainStage.
Reaper has a native Linux client. Logic and MainStage... are you serious? :D
Windows on ARM performance is near native when run under macOS. `virtiofs` mounts aren't nearly as fast as native Linux filesystem access, but Colima/Lima can be very fast if you (for example) move build artifacts and dependency caches inside the VM.
See, that's where the MacOS shitshow begins: Parallels costs €189.99 and it looks like they are pushing towards subscriptions. I am not in the ecosystem, but Parallels is the only hypervisor I've ever seen recommended.
Another example is Little Snitch. Beloved and recommended Firewall. Just 59€! (IIRC, MacOS doesn't even respect user network configuration, when it comes to Apple services, e.g. bypassing VPN setups...)
Now, don't get me wrong, I am certain there are ways around it, but Apple people really need to introspect what it commonly means to run a frictionless MacOS. It's pretty ridiculous, especially coming from Linux.
I mean c'mon... paying for a firewall and hypervisor? Even running proprietary binaries for these kind of OS-level features seems moderately insane.
Except when you need something like UDP ports, for example. I tried it for 2-3 weeks, but I always encountered similar issues. At the end I just started to use custom Alpine VMs with UTM, and run Docker inside them. All networking configured with pf.
Not at all, you are stuck with a machine that has only 256GB of ssd(and not upgradeable) and 60hz LCD screen, also only 2 IO ports.
the M4 maybe the best mobile CPU, but that does not mean it will make every machine with it the best.
Not sure why 60Hz is a limitation, I've been on 60Hz for 20 years+, outside of gaming I do not see any value in going higher.
Re: refresh rate, it’s nice, but I wouldn’t miss it most of the time. I have my external monitor for my work M3 running at 120 Hz because I can, not because I need it.
Also a MacMini is not mobile, and even if I take the mini, it neither has a screen or keyboard. The thing is I don't need it WHILE I'm traveling, I need my laptop at the destination. And because that is less than 5% of the time I use it, there is no issue in carrying the external 2.5" HDD that I keep on my dock. You personal use-case may vary.
I won't recommend my monitor because it has auto-dimming you can not turn off. Good but not great.
So they are about one generation behind? That's not bad really. What's the AMD or Intel chip equivalent to the M2 or M3? Is somebody making a fanless laptop with it?
I don't think the market is there for fanless non-Mac laptops. Most people would rather have a budget system (no $ for proper passive cooling) or more powerful system.
The low end of the market is for sure bigger but I think Apple has shown that the higher end can be profitable too. Dell, HP, Lenovo, and the other big laptop makers aren't afraid of having a thousand different SKUs. They could add one more for a higher end machine that's fanless.
I bought a MacBook Air because it was cheaper and met my needs. Being passively cooled was just a nice bonus.
Most of it can be explained away with TSMC. If you compared Apple's 5nm parts (M2), with AMD's 4nm parts, you'll see the performance swing in just about the same magnitude but in favor of AMD. M5 is 3rd gen 3nm.
I've been running linux laptops with AMD/intel for years, and while some focus on more battery life would be welcome, the cpu never bothered me.
My primary limiation is available RAM (esp. when debugging react native against a complete local docker setup), which unfortunately on both AMD/Intel but far more so on Apple is usually limited to higher compute CPU's, which drives up cost of laptop (not even including the extra cost of RAM on Apple).
The only really locally CPU intensive processes I run on a laptop are Rust builds, and then still I would prioritize RAM over CPU if that would be possible, because Rust builds are fast enough, especially when incrementally compiling (and I almost never do lto release-like builds locally unless doing benchmarking or profiling work)
I love Rust but I think you might be the first person to say that!
Intel, on the other hand, started a few generation ago with an edge in terms of efficiency, and now they're behind; they are definitely the one that fell asleep.
The fact that ARM may have unreachable efficiency doesn't mean that AMD, as x86 producer, is doing nothing.
365: 2515/12552 M4: 3763/14694
https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/amd-ryzen-ai-9-365 https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/11020192
OTOH, Geekbench correlates (0.99) with SPEC standards, the industry standard in CPU benchmark and what enterprise companies such as AWS use to judge a CPU performance.
https://medium.com/silicon-reimagined/performance-delivered-...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43287208
The article in question doesn't mention subpar ARM optimizations.
It had always been both ways. This is why there exist(ed) quite a lot of people who have/had serious thoughts whether [some benchmark] actually measures the performance of the e.g. CPU or the quality of the compiler.
The "truce" that was adopted concerning these very heated discussions was that a great CPU is of much less value if programmers are incapable of making use of its power.
Examples that evidence the truth of this "truce" [pun intended]:
- Sega Saturn (very hard to make use of its power)
- PlayStation 3 (Cell processor)
- Intel Itanium, which (besides some other problems) needed a super-smart compiler (which never existed) so that programs could make use of its potential
- in the last years: claims that specific AMD GPUs are as fast as or even faster than NVidia GPUs (also: for the same cost) for GPGPU tasks. Possibly true, but CUDA makes it easier to make use of the power of the NVidia GPU.
Well, no such thing is possible. Memory access and branch prediction patterns are too dynamic for a compiler to be able to schedule basically anything ahead of time.
A JIT with a lot of instrumentation could do somewhat better, but it'd be very expensive.
https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-amd_ryzen_ai_9_365...
Edit: Looks like OP stealth edited "double" to "50%". Still lol.
It's interesting I've seen that often on trending posts. There is enough traffic that any variation of a comment will have readers