Last Active
  • Apple's shift to ARM Mac at WWDC will define a decade of computing

    glh said:
    The bad part is that Apple is cutting itself off from lots of standard software developed by non-Mac people that may never be ported over.
    That's exactly the point. That's what's holding the Mac and the entire platform back. With x86 compatibility many developers simply won't bother to bring native software to the Mac. With the iPhone and iPad dominating the offices of corporate executives and the creative crowd, a move to ARM will force many choose to go native on the platform, which will expand the available software that now only on x86. Apple is the most valuable company in the world and while it doesn't dominant marketshare, it dominants profit and mindshare. Whatever Apple can offer with ARM it must be so compelling that they are willing to take the risk. I don't think Apple's ARM is going to match INTEL or AMD, I think it's going to leap past them and Apple has the resources to do it.

    x86 was bridge back to custom RISC chips as Apple developed ARM chips over the last decade. No one has matched the success and profits that the iPhone and iPad (computers) have.
  • Apple TV hardware is a great example of Apple's full-stack integration, and is overlooked

    Why not add a USB port and a Time Machine function to it or add a Time Machine function to HomePod? Seriously, Time Machine  sucks on anything other than an Airport or TimeCapsule. Why not both home devices? It would be trivial to add.
  • OWC Mercury Extreme Pro 6G SSD now offers 4TB capacity

    MacPro said:

    tzeshan said:
    cia said:
    tzeshan said:
    cia said:
    First off, in regards to speed, this is a SATA III drive.  The SATA III bus is the limiting factor for speeds, not the drive.  

    Second, this drive uses MLC, which allows it to provide those peak speeds over very long writes.  TLC is great and cheap, but when you are copying large files (Example, 2 hours of ProRes video in one file, is about 122 gig) TLC based drives will hit bottlenecks and slow down.  TLC has limits that most users don't ever see.  MLC (and even better, SLC) handles stuff like this better.

    This is a "pro" drive for pro users who are still using SATAIII based machines.

    If you don't read/write hundreds and hundreds of GB every day, you don't need this drive, buy a cheaper SSD and you won't notice the difference.   

    I have an NVME PCI card in my MacPro, but also have a cheap $20 SATA III card in there too, this drive will work well in my video workflow as a 1080p live video record drive.
    Thanks for the info? Is TLC suitable for Time Machine backup?
    Literally anything (even old slow cheap massive spinning drives) is fine for Time Machine backups.  I personally use a Western Digital 8TB spinning disk USB3 external drive for my Time Machine Backups.  I paid maybe $100 for it.
    I use a G-drive. But it takes too much time. 
    I'm using a standard Apple Time Capsule which backups up incrementally every hour. Why would I care how long it takes? For a clone time might be an issue.

    In the end these OWC drives are an all around cost effective solution. There are also some middle of the road NVME drives that offer 1GB/s which are less pricy than the 2GB/s models. 
    I worry about Time Machine these days.  Dropped in 2018 by Apple.  No APFS.  I worry about how well it can truly back up and restore an APFS boot drive with Catalina.  It's dog slow due to hardlinks and I swear it degrades the LAN speed.
    APFS formatted volumes have issues with hard links so the TimeMachine volume must be HFS+. Whether that's TM on a TimeCapsule or TM on an external HD it has to be HFS+ so support for APFS is somewhat irrelevant at this point. If there are any performance compatibility issues I haven't noticed. I also use CCC to backup clones with a safety net so I'm covered either way.

    My only issue with Time Machine is that I've yet to find a 3rd party solution that has all of TM's features. I tried using one such solution with a Netgear router and it was lacking in so many ways, plus it would fail weekly and have to be rebuilt from scratch.

    Types of disks you can use with Time Machine on Mac

    Are we ready for Time Machine 2.0 yet?
  • Compared: 2020 13-inch MacBook Pro versus 2020 MacBook Air

    KITA said:
    KITA said:
    entropys said:
    I wish Apple would put discrete graphics into it’s smaller MBP, it is a Pro model after all! 
    Probably too many thermal and battery issues. Now, if they put an AMD Ryzen in there that might expand the Possibilities.
    Razer did a pretty good job putting a GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q in a 3 lbs 13" laptop, and lesser dGPUs like the MX250/MX350 could also work.

    Ryzen 4000 U would have made a big difference.

    Here's a budget $650 Acer laptop that beats out even the most powerful MBP 13". It's using Ryzen 7 4700U. It has 8 cores / 8 threads + Vega 7 graphics.

    1065G7 is not the most powerful processor in the 13" MBP 2020. The most powerful is the i7 1068NG7 28W  chip with the Intel Iris Plus. It may still not be as fast but it will be able to sustain a higher speeds with 28W vs the 15W in the Ryzen.
    The MBP with the 28W i5 only scored ~1700 points. The i7 is not going to come anything close to the Ryzen 4700U in that test.



    I'd also mention that the 27W Ryzen 7 4800U (8 cores / 16 threads + Vega 8) scores almost 3600:

    I never said the 28W i7 would be faster than the 15W 4700U Ryzen in a Cinebench test. I'm just talking about the processor in general under sustained load since I don't play games or use 3D application, so for me this kind of test isn't important.

    I more interested in general real world CPU speed, SSD speed and encoding speeds. The Mac certainly has an advantage in the last two because of the T-2 chip (video encoding/decoding and SSD encryption) and Apple's SSD (best in class speeds). But there are also other things you won't find in that $650 laptop like a best in class T-1 chip fingerprint reader, a best in class Trackpad, 4x full-speed Thunderbolt ports and what are apparently some of the best speakers in a slim laptop.

    There's a lot more to a laptop than just the CPU/GPU which affect the experience and the price.

    Below is from the review on Tom's Hardware... the display just makes it useless for any professional grade video or photography. Despite having an awesome Ryzen processor it doesn't really seem to outpace the Del XPS with a 1056G7 in any meaningful way other than 3D.

    You have to compare Apples to Apples when looking at the value of a laptop. That $650 laptop would easily cost $1799 if it had comparable all around specs.

    Acer Swift 3 (AMD): Meet Ryzen 7 4700U


    A nice processor that has an advantage with 3D application


    • Display is dark with poor contrast
    • Audio lacks bass
    • Webcam image is barely visible regardless of lighting
    • Build quality feels fragile
    • Slow SSD (in comparison to the MBP which blows it out of the water by a factor of 6x)
    • Lower resolution display
    • Poor color range
    • No Thunderbolt (integrated into the 10th GEN Intel chips)
    • Lackluster trackpad
    • Lackluster finger printer reader and no T-1 Chip security
    • No T-2 Chip with on the fly encryption and encoding which takes load off of the CPU
    • Only a single cooling fan which may cause CPU/GPU throttling under load
    • Older LPDDR4 RAM which is less power efficient
    • Etc, etc, etc,.

  • Refreshed 13-inch MacBook Pro may have 4TB storage option, 32GB memory

    Philtky said:
    You’re all talking CPU and screen size, but all I want is a GPU on a Pro Apple computer! I’m sure many of the prosumers need a laptop to move around, but actually work on desktop, plug on the charger and an external display. I mean using an intel gpu on a pro laptop is a joke to me.
    I've pretty much stopped caring since I'm not doing 4k multi-cam editing, 3D or gaming any more. For everything else the IRIS PLUS should be plenty zippy. It's just about on par with a low end dGPU.