auxio

foregoneconclusion said:

Unified memory IS more efficient than DDR. There’s no 1x1 comparison between the two. 

DDR (double data rate) is just the data throughput of RAM, which doesn't say anything about how much memory is required by applications.

However, the point about unified memory being more efficient (apps require less overall RAM) is correct. Without it apps which need to, for example, display an image on the screen need to store a copy of that image in both CPU memory (RAM) and GPU memory (VRAM). With unified memory they only need one copy because both the CPU and GPU can access the same memory. The same holds true for machine learning and the NPU (neural processing unit).

All that said, people without critical thinking skills (i.e. the majority of the population) simply follow the "bigger is better" logic. And so if Apple hopes to sell to such people, they'll have to bump the specs, even if those people will never need that extra memory.

zeus423 said:

I've never listened to a minute of Joe Rogan. I honestly don't care if someone does. It makes no difference in my life. 

I believe in free speech. To paraphrase George Carlin, if you don't like something, change the channel.

So what do you do when you realize you're surrounded by those who don't change the channel, and they've been convinced you're the enemy because you did?

Calvinator said:

Object lesson: If you show a little backbone, cancel culture is toothless. As is the inane agenda of the woke.

Object lesson: it's all about eyeballs and money. Inflammatory language and reaction/division generating topics are latest round of bread and circuses.

sflocal said:

Xed said:

That's not entirely true. Huawei and Samsung can do it... after they get ahold of Apple's designs and tech specs.

If there's one certainty in life is that iKnockoff companies like Samsung, Xiaomi, and Huawei bought the VisionPro and reverse-engineering it.  Without Apple's top-quality software to go with it, they will fail.

Software is just as easy (if not easier) to reverse engineer/clone as hardware. And lawsuits tend to favour the cloners

Really makes me wonder who's funding them. To generate this kind of media hype and political interest in something so insignificant reeks of well-connected investors.

How about we investigate why tech companies which truly innovate and create new products/services that are of benefit to people can't generate as much interest as a company which reverse engineers and clones an existing product?