netrox

ApplePoor said:

Wonder if the price will be close to the prior generation like last time?

I may be tempted this time and take my M1 Ultra Mac Studio (128GB & 8TB SSD) and use it as my file server to replace the aging and soon to be unsupported Intel i7 powered Mac mini (64GB OWC Ram and 2 TB soldered SSD). The M1 Mac Studio trade in value is less than a possible M3 Pro mini with maximum memory and a 2 TB SD. and probably will be supported for quite a few more years.

I remember in the 70s that a 32kb memory card from Digital Equipment Corp (DEC) for my PDP-11 cost $2,000. Every generation that followed in the same form factor doubled the amount of memory for the same $2,000. The last one was 4MB. I used 1.5MB for programs and 2.5MB as a virtual swap disc for compiling Dibol code which was blazingly faster than any of the spinning platters of the day.

However, even while calling his own video and Apple's other examples "undeniably vivid," CNET's Stein said it was "a tiny bit disappointing that the videos can't be recorded in 4K resolution."

I imagine that would be too expensive to compute at this point. 

Isn't that they are recorded with two 2K resolution and merged as 4K worth of data for 3D? So, it would make sense they don't do 8K at this time. 

thadec said:

DrDumDum said:

thadec said:

As someone who does a lot of virtualization (Linux and Windows virtual machines in VMWare, Parallels etc.) I can say that 8 GB of RAM on on the latest, fastest Apple CPU definitely is not analogous to 16 GB RAM on an 8th generation Core i3 from 2017.

I read both posts... but didnt see anywhere where you actually owned a base M1/M2 machine to test your "theory".

A lot of people here are still stuck in the "intel" mindset. I get it hard to shake.  I do tech consulting for graphic designers, and over the last 15 years if I had a nickel for every time I said "theres no such thing as too much ram" id be a billionaire.

Happily i dont have to anymore. I moved 15% of my older basic intel clients to M1 minis with 8/512 setups... dual screens + fast SSD external working drives... all loving the speed. those with higher demands went to 16 GB.... many came from 32 GB ram setups. No issues. Watch for refurbs. 16/512 M1 minis were $700. M2 shoudl be th4e same.

First off, I own an M2 Mac Mini. 
Second, what "theory"? Virtualization is when you use hypervisor software run a virtual computer on your computer hardware and OS. No matter what CPU, architecture, OS, manufacturer etc. you are talking about it is the same because the requirements of the operating system that you are running doesn't change. So you are still going to need 4 GB of RAM to run a Windows 11 VM. You are still going to need 2 GB of RAM to run a Linux VM. Period. Otherwise, your virtual computer's OS will run out of resources just as it would if you were to install the OS on physical hardware that's insufficient to handle the specs. If you don't believe me, go to ServeTheHome.com. They promote low end - meaning slow - hardware that supports a lot of RAM for virtualization servers all the time. A lot of people buy old - meaning slow - machines off Newegg and Ebay to use as virtualization servers because they have a ton of RAM. But hey, don't take my word for it. You install Windows on VirtualBox or VMWare Player and configure it to use 2 GB of RAM instead of 4 GB because "RAM on a Mac is 'effectively' twice that on a PC." See if your Windows VM even boots up.

Even better. Get a photo editor, whether Krita, GIMP, Inkscape or whatever (they are all free). Go download one of those high resolution images from NASA: https://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/target/Earth
Try to edit one of those bad boys with 8 GB RAM. Don't worry! Apple's executives claim that it is just as good as doing so with 16 GB RAM, so it will work out fine!