cgWerks

Xed said:
I would definitely recommend using a free email service over telling the average person who isn't very tach savvy to purchase a domain, purchase an email service to use with their domain, and to set it all up on their own. My mother doesn't need to do all that to have a good email experience. Even with the ease of modern setups for Gmail, iCloud, etc. it's still a daunting task for the average person.

Yes, it is slightly more complex, but not really that much. The bar is just horribly low for this kind of user.

I mean, you buy a domain, pay for an email service (domain connection is typically a paid feature). There might be a 'push button' setup if you've picked popular services, and if not, a tech support person can setup the email in the domain in their sleep in a minute or two.

BlueLightning said:
Remember that TSMC makes the majority of CPUs/GPUs for AMD, Apple and NVIDIA (and many others).  

Samsung makes most of the remaining leading edge chips.  
Intel is way behind, and any high performance chips they have are not good candidates for laptops that are GPU intensive.  
Intel laptops have to be plugged-in to achieve high GPU performance, with large amounts of heat and suck batteries dry rapidly.  

True, though this mainly means they'll just use more power while doing it... but at least they can do it.
Apple seems a bit ahead on the CPU front, but quite a way behind on the GPU end.

9secondkox2 said:

This. Article could really do without that last line. 

It’s not like a hostile press didn’t earn it. 

No doubt, they've (press) been over-the-top daffy in response to Musk buying Twitter.

My concern is that this person's track record doesn't look good when it comes to free-speech concerns and trying to keep the politics from driving Twitter back into the hole.

9secondkox2 said:
Can’t wait to see it become “X.” Will dominate. 

I'm honestly concerned about that, too. I want Twitter to be Twitter. I'm not sure I want (or need) it to become the 'everything' app.

JP234 said:

"Elon has committed to being accessible to everyone for continual feedback," Yaccarino said near the end of the interview. "If freedom of speech, as he says, is the bedrock of this country, I'm not sure there's anyone in this room who could disagree with that."

Indeed. Who could disagree with that?

They might say that, but actions speak louder than words. Pre-Elon Twitter was about anything but free-speech. Everyone seems willing to say free-speech is a bedrock, but few seem to actually back that up.

anonymouse said:

... under his control Twitter will continue to devolve into the cesspool he is making it. 

I've been on Twitter for quite a long time, and it has never been better on almost any metric I can think of. What's the beef?

fastasleep said:
LOL you Musk sycophants are really something else. Nobody grounded in reality could look at Twitter right now and say this with a straight face. It's a five alarm dumpster fire sinking into a cesspool.

How so?

Stabitha_Christie said:
Above all else Twitter is an adverting platform. Having a successful adverting executive run an advertising company does make sense. 

I'd rather it be a service. Advertising ruins most things. But, maybe given the financial realities, that isn't possible at this point.

williamlondon said:
Doesn't matter if advertisers won't spend money with twitter because it's such a fucking RWNJ cesspit now (despite how wonderful she *might* be), especially now that they're looking at bringing the advertiser repeller (Fucker Carlson) to the platform.

The key here is how bad the other platforms are screwing up. Carlson has a massive audience. If Twitter becomes a successful platform for distribution of shows to compete with YouTube, etc. w/o the baloney, it could become quite successful.

That said, I think there are even better platforms, as even Twitter will unlikely be as hands-off as it could be, in terms of success for such shows.

mark fearing said:
What? It’s doing well? Half the audience or more left it. Advertisers left it. He bought it, overpaid because of ego, and they will write it off as it falls apart.

Sorry, that's total baloney. A few people left. Advertisers virtue-signaled and have been returning. He probably did vastly overpay, but he seems to have done that at least partly in principal (which, makes him a hero for that aspect, at least).

crofford said:
So - your point is Elon made a bad pick and then you used another Musk company example as how to do it right?

Probably not a bad point, as Tesla and SpaceX have been quite successful.

Stabitha_Christie said:

williamlondon said:
Doesn't matter if advertisers won't spend money with twitter because it's such a fucking RWNJ cesspit now (despite how wonderful she *might* be), especially now that they're looking at bringing the advertiser repeller (Fucker Carlson) to the platform.

As someone else pointed out, what a moron for paying $44B for a platform and turning it into something he could have bought (Parler) for ~$200. Musk thinks he's Midas, the results say the opposite.

You seem to be reading my comment as some sort of endorsement of Twitter or Musk. It isn't the guy is a complete nob and I'm fairly convinced that Twitter will implode or be sold off at an incredible loss. My point that if your business is adverting then having someone that has success at an executive level isn't a bad choice to run it. She is qualified for the job. Plenty of qualified and talented have not failed to save a floundering company. 

You're thinking clearly. It is these 'knee-jerk Elon haters' who aren't. Kind of like Apple, I've been extremely critical of Elon at points, while appreciating the good things he does. It's a sign of intellectual maturity, which I guess is rare these days.

Heh, just a funny little anecdote... but I just caught up the other day with an old friend who works in top-tier tech support of a big multinational IT service (ie. he does tech support when the tech support at companies or vendors get in over their heads) and he's still using an email address from his ISP he got back in the 90s.

Bummer, I'll be waiting for the M3 minimally. But, my Intel mini w/eGPU is still doing well, so should make it just fine.

Unfortunately, my son needs to buy something in the next few months, so we're probably looking at M1 Max or M2 Pro and trying to figure out which has the edge for what he does (and will want to do).

It seems more like it is the M1, M1.25 (called M2), and M2 (called M3) in reality. Hopefully that M3 will put Apple a bit more back where many of his were thinking/hoping when this Apple Silicon stuff started. We're now solidly back to playing catch-up with the PC market, at least in terms of GPUs.

We all got bit by Apple's early planning/design, I think. I was amazed at what Apple accomplished when everyone was deep in the pandemic, but now 3 years later, we're feeling the reality of the pandemic on Apple. It was just delayed a lot more than other companies.

What I really hope we'll start hearing, is more of the tech differences of the M3, instead of just more cores and energy efficiency (again, mostly on the GPU-front). We're now years into the transition, and we still don't really know what Apple's plan is for the pro users in GPU-centric disciplines.

macxpress said:
I wanna say that the MacBook Air is Apple's top selling laptop?

That even makes it a bit more puzzling, as my understanding is a huge problem here is going to be supply/yields. It seems like they might just be trying to follow the release schedule they've initiated (ie. new chip starts in the low end models and then to more advanced systems). Otherwise, they'd maybe be better to introduce the M3 in the Pro and Studio.

AniMill said:

Either the Mac Pro is dead, or so delayed that it’s become superfluous in their product lineup. Perhaps it’s become such a niche that any further investment simply is not a viability for Apple anymore. Either way, if Apple does not at least preview a Mac Pro option at WWDC, I think it’s dead Jim. Though $3000 ski goggles are considered the “next” thing - but I believe AR/VR is already past the public interest inflection point. WWDC is going to be a very interesting show.

Yeah, I'll certainly check it out, but kind of sounds like another yawner on the way. I have near zero interest in the VR stuff at this point. Maybe a bit in AR, but more professionally (vertical markets) than any use for myself personally.

I'm a bit torn on the Mac Pro as well. Unless they give-in in terms of expandability, the Studio seems like the new Mac Pro. What would be the point of a huge case if it can't be expanded? (And, but give-in, I mean add AMD GPUs or something like that back to the platform.)

I'm hoping they are just way behind - the M3 will be impressive - and they would just be too embarrassed to release a Mac Pro right now with M1/M2 tech in it.

9secondkox2 said:
A delay means that Apple is ensuring I’m the Mac Peo is the butt-kicking, name-taking monster it’s supposed to be. 

That's the hard thing for me to grasp. It would seem (at least from what we know), unless they add AMD back in, it's going to be adequate at best. Hopefully we're pleasantly surprised. Currently, at least for GPU, a top of the line Mac kind of equals a mid-level gaming PC... and then only somewhat (better at one task, worse at others).

Note: this is on the pro side, though. On the consumer side, Apple is certainly kicking butt.

YasminG said:

I’m sick and tired waiting for a new iMac. They should have at least offered an M2 offering

I think they just didn't want to do an iMac M1.25.