canukstorm

About

Username
canukstorm
Joined
Visits
205
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
4,215
Badges
1
Posts
2,796

Reactions

2.7KLike47Dislike319Informative

  • iMac 24-inch M3 review: A clear sign that Intel Mac support is ending soon

    canukstormcanukstorm
    The M3 iMac is a very nice upgrade but Apples pricing for memory and SSD upgrades is ludicrous.  These upgrade prices should be sliced in half immediately and Apple would still be making huge profit margins on them.  Minimum configuration should be 16GB and 512GB SSD.  The lower options should not exist. 

      Moreover, Apple is always pounding its chest about how green they are but then they create an entry level high volume consumer product that will be out of use and in a landfill within 5 years.   If they doubled the memory and SSD size it would last many more useful years 
    "Minimum configuration should be 16GB and 512GB SSD" => In this day and age, I agree.
    muthuk_vanalingamwilliamlondon9secondkox2Alex1NnubusjonamacPauloSeraawatto_cobraargonaut

  • iMac 24-inch M3 review: A clear sign that Intel Mac support is ending soon

    canukstormcanukstorm
    "Our review unit had a 512GB SSD" => How much RAM did your review consist of?
    williamlondon9secondkox2Alex1Nwatto_cobra

  • Apple confirms that there is no Apple Silicon 27-inch iMac in the works

    canukstormcanukstorm
    Rogue01 said:

    mike1 said:
    timmillea said:
    Next on the culling list is the Mac Studio. When a 14" MacBook Pro can outshine a Mac Pro in reported benchmarks, then the entire M3 SoC family can be fitted to a Mac Mini. There is simply no need for the Studio. 


    Wow. That is a ridiculous conclusion. Everyone should stop developing new computers and chips now. timmillea has decreed that computers can no longer get faster/smaller/more efficient or better in any way. Do you seriously not believe that the Studio, Pro with M4 and M5 or whatever is coming won't have better benchmarks than the current M3?!
    Actually it is not so ridiculous considering the M3 Pro is only 6% faster than the M2 Pro, and intentionally hobbled by Apple to upsell their other computers.  The M3 Max has the huge increase in performance, but the M3 Pro was hobbled with two less performance cores, one less GPU core, and 25% slower memory bandwidth than the M2 Pro.  Why would Apple do this when they claim Apple Silicon is so great?  So a MacBook Pro with M3 Max will be faster than a Mac Studio with M2 Pro and M3 Pro.  So the 3nm process for the M3 Pro did absolutely nothing for the chip.  If Apple maintained the 8 core performance and 4 core efficiency with the same GPU core and same memory bandwidth, the M3 Pro would be a much better chip.  So don't assume the M4 or later would be surprisingly better when everyone thought the M3 was going to be this huge performance boost.  Only true if you look at the M3 and M3 Max.  M3 Pro is a waste.
    Apparently, the 3nm process did wonders for the battery life.  This reviewer got the following SKU to test;

    "The model we reviewed is a step up, with an 11-core M3 Pro chip with 14 GPU cores, 18GB of memory, and a 512GB drive—all for $1,999"

    "    Apple claims that the new MacBook Pro will last 22 hours in battery tests, but we found that isn't accurate. In our video rundown test, the 14-inch Pro lasted even longer, crossing the 30-hour threshold, becoming the longest-lasting laptop we've ever tested. That it does so while driving increased processing and graphics performance over the previous long-lasting model is all the more impressive."

    Apple MacBook Pro 14-Inch (2023, M3 Pro) Review | PCMag
    FileMakerFeller9secondkox2tenthousandthingsAlex1Nwatto_cobra

  • Apple killed Android plans for Apple Watch

    canukstormcanukstorm
    Apple Watch is a great device and the king of smart watches.  It literally owns the market, like iPod did the MP3 player market.  If Apple is serious about making a difference in health, and I genuinely think they are, this is a mistake.  When you factor in Android, the potential market for AW is bigger than iPhone, not just in terms of device sales but also social impact.
    muthuk_vanalingamwilliamlondonmacplusplus

  • New Apple Silicon has arrived with M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max chips

    canukstormcanukstorm
    AppleZulu said:
    designr said:
    Interesting that they kept comparing performance to the M1—as if the M2 didn't exist.

    I mean I get it. Just funny. You gotta pat close attention to what (and how) Apple presents. They are very clever.
    Apple doesn’t market current year devices as replacements of prior year devices. They really don’t even market them as replacements for two-year old devices, but the M1 is the first in the series, so it offers a good benchmark. Besides, they also repeated comparisons to Intel Macs as well. 
    That's because almost half of the Mac installed base is still using Intel Macs
    williamlondondewmeronntenthousandthings