commentzilla

I don’t want a back door installed on my device. They could scan for anything.

"A lot of impressive engineering went into making this thing as thin as possible, but did anyone really need a thinner all-in-one desktop? Apple's priorities continue to baffle," the site wrote.

Apple ships products by air, not only paying for weight but also for volume. So shipping smaller computers with less packing material does result in a cost savings. This savings is also realized again when a computer under warranty has to be shipped to Apple and returned to the user. Last but not least, a smaller computer requires less materials to build. In total there is a noticeable savings for Apple. Plus, it simply looks more stylish and the absence of the power supply in the case reduces the amount of heat that needs to be dissipated and the energy used to accomplish that cooling.

The M1 has generally been a smooth experience. It is better than my 2020 Intel MBP 13" 32GB for sure. Same speed or better, plus it runs silent and cool.

Now that a lot of these native apps are coming through, the CPU, memory and swap memory usage have dropped during normal use. Once all of the apps are native this machine will be borderline magical compared to the Intel hairdryer I had before.

Oh yeah, the battery life is INSANE and that's not an exaggeration. The battery management is also great. My previous Intel Mac lost 8% of its capacity in the first month and again after I complained and they replaced it, it fell again. In contrast, my M1 is still at 100% battery capacity after 3-months. Those Intel processors really wear out the battery.

I don't miss Intel at all. Thanks, Apple!

JWSC said:

danox said:

JWSC said:

mknelson said:

Tech607 said:

The better way of handling this is to tax their products as they come back into this country. Do this until they learn that if you hurt the American people by manufacturing in China it will cost you where it hurts. Not give them millions just so they take that cash and still move most of their operations over seas. 

Either way it will cost the American people - either though higher costs on the product (that's what happens with duties) or taxpayer funded subsidies.

This at least has a more direct chance of brining in some good paying jobs.

Those good paying jobs you’re talking about would only be temporary. Without fundamental changes in the economic environment (and I’m really referring to U.S. Government taxes and regulation) those jobs will require permanent subsidies, which is a non-starter.

For too long, the unchallenged assumption that China has an inherent manufacturing advantage over the U.S. has diverted our collective attention away from our self inflicted sclerosis due to vast over-regulation (see California) coupled with self defeating and job destroying minimum wage requirements.

The U.S. is full of self-starting individuals and small businesses that would jump at the chance to change the world.  The entrepreneurial spirit is still alive and well.  And despite what some claim, the U.S. still has unrivaled talent in these core technologies.  But it needs to be repeated over and over that the Government needs to get OUT OF THE WAY.  Unfortunately, that stance seems to be increasingly unpopular these days.  It appears that we’d rather spend money to correct a problem that has an easy and costless to the taxpayer fix.

America’s management talent lies in being anti worker, anti union and slave labor at all cost, git yer low payed gig on. Have money for the workers give it to management instead so they can buy something for themselves. Lamborghini anyone.....

I’m curious as to which countries you would compare the U.S. to with regard to the CC supposed “anti worker” sentiment you write of. Is China the model nation with its wages and working conditions?  Or perhaps some European country with hefty social benefits that goes with a correspondingly high unemployment rate.

Germany has hefty social benefits and a very low unemployment rate. They are Europe’s largest economy. So those two things don’t always go hand in hand;  Or perhaps some European country with hefty social benefits that goes with a correspondingly high unemployment rate.

Anilu_777 said:

That makes no sense. When you convert $500 to Euros it’s a straight conversion. No loss

The rate is constantly in flux and the dollar has lost value since the kits were purchased last summer. So the refund is worth less to European developers than to US developers because of the exchange rate alone. I wish they had given the full calculation of how they arrived at that 100+ euro amount but the issue here is the disparity of the refund based on the difference in the purchase price and the refund in local currency.