crowley

right_said_fred said:

waveparticle said:

hexclock said:

nicholfd said:

lkrupp said:

sdw2001 said:

maciekskontakt said:

I am touched. Wait a moment.I have never been on Twitter and left Facebook one year ago. Maybe changes to Meta and Dorsey leaving Twitter were result of that 

I quit both earlier this year.  Both are evil companies.  I don't suspect this will improve Twitter at all.  At Least Hipster Rasputin won't have his mug everywhere.  

Apple is not exactly a saint either. Maybe not ‘evil’ per se but tiptoeing around it sometimes.

WTF does Apple have to do with any of this?  They don't have a social media presence!

He’s not wrong though, as Apple sometimes treads in murky waters, especially in regard to China. 

In regard to Twitter, nothing will change about that company. Unfortunately he is still on at Square. 

Did Apple experience China haters' accusations in China? None! Nada! This is unlike what Twitter experienced in US. 

Twitter experienced USA haters in the USA? That’s what you’re saying? 

Jack Twitter Dorsey acted like a coward. His lack of courage undermined democracy in the USA

DuhSesame said:

crowley said:

DuhSesame said:

docno42 said:

DuhSesame said:
No other laptops (except Alienware) can do eGPU+external SSD without any interference. 

Apple SOC doesn't support eGPU and I would expect it's a low priority, if it's even a goal.  Another red herring.  

Pfft.

we’re talking about older Intel models and you wanna switch topics to M1s.

If you don’t understand how it works, I won’t blame you.  Switching conversation is too low for me.  No more arguments.

No one was talking about Intel machines, this entire thread is about the new MacBook Pros.  You should probably get on the same page as everyone else before throwing around accusations that other people don't understand.

Oh are we not?  I said "Intel Macs with eGPU + SSD" but the M1 can't use eGPUs, so Thunderbolt on Intel is also pointless?  We are comparing older Macs to older laptops, aren't we?

Either way, I explained on the post above, he clearly doesn't understand why and I don't want to waste my time.

DuhSesame said:

crowley said:

macplusplus said:

tundraboy said:

macplusplus said:

tundraboy said:

macplusplus said:

This has nothing to do with Jony Ive. Intel forced Apple to go minimalistic because of the generous heat it produces. Give it more oenclosure it would retain more heat. Now that Intel has gone, with Apple Silicon you can make it as large as you want because the heat is minimal.

You have it backwards.  You're confusing heat with temperature.  If you go minimalistic on a device that generates a lot of heat, that heat will be 'concentrated' on a smaller volume, causing temperature to be higher, and it is temperature that damages internal components.  The key is to think in terms of heat dissipation not heat retention.  A larger enclosed volume (all other things equal) would have better heat dissipation especially if a lot of that enclosed volume is empty space that can be used for airflow to cool the internal components.

This is the metal mass that retains heat the most not the air that flows over or in it. Besides, the air flows only from the processor to the heat sink by means of a pipe and the fan, the flow is constrained to the pipe. There is no air "moving freely" in a larger enclosure. Since the air flows only from the processor to the sink, it has no (or minimal) effect on the overall cooldown of the enclosure. To make it cool down faster, you have to make it smaller so that it retains less heat and dissipates it faster. That "cooling air in a larger enclosure" is an urban legend. There is no such thing.

I didn't spell it out explicitly but of course when I said airflow, I'm speaking about it in the context of the MacBook Pro which has fans.

In an electronic device, the internal components generate the heat, not the enclosure.  You want to dissipate that heat so that the temperature of the internal components don't rise to the point that they fry.  What an enclosure does is absorb the heat generated by the components and then dissipate it by radiating it off its external surface area.  (Heat never ever flows from a cold body to a hot body.  At least not in this universe.) So, all other things equal, the smaller your enclosure, the less mass it has to absorb the heat from the components, and the less external surface area it has to dissipate that heat it absorbed from the components.  And that's not even talking about heat sinks and cooling fans.

Now let's stick heat sinks and cooling fans into the narrative.  If a smaller enclosure gives you less internal space, forcing you to use smaller heat sinks, smaller fans and smaller airflow channels, then clearly going minimalistic is going to reduce, not increase, your ability to dissipate the heat generated by the components.

This is why your assertion that the generous heat produced by Intel chips caused Apple to go minimalistic is problematic.  The heat generated by a chip is in fact an obstacle to going minimalistic.

That's where the vicious death cycle begins. Put bigger fans, bigger pipes, bigger sinks, they will require bigger batteries and bigger enclosures that will retain even more heat that will require even bigger fans, bigger pipes, bigger sinks that will require.... and so on.

Bigger enclosure may absorb more heat, but once it absorbs that it becomes a heat source itself. According to your mentality we can cool down a hot object faster if we put it into an enclosure instead of leaving it in the open air !..

Bigger heat pipes and heatsinks do not require bigger batteries.  Fans don't really either, they aren't a significant power draw, maybe a watt for a beefy one. And bigger enclosures do not act as heat sources, they dissipate heat over a greater surface area. 

You don't need bigger heat pipes, sinks or fans on a bigger enclosure with the same components, unless you're trying to give yourself more thermal headroom.  The idea that adding more cooling would in some way lead to a net heat increase should be immediately and obviously absurd.

Smaller computers have more problems with thermals.  The new MBP 14 will spin up its fans much earlier and faster than the MBP 16 precisely because of the density of heat generating components, even though they're the same components as the 16. You're dead wrong on this.

The 16” is built for bigger chip that haven’t been released yet.

The point really being making it thicker isn’t the only way to get better cooling, which many of the commentators simply couldn’t comprehend.  Your older Unibody & Retinas only got worse thermals cause their design, not just chips.

The upper limit really resides on your pipes, sink & fans, you can always improve them despite the chassis limit.

foregoneconclusion said:

Oh sure, the "infamous" butterfly keyboard...it was supposedly more prone to failure than the prior scissor mechanism (according to tech blogs), yet nobody could provide any actual evidence or numbers that proved it. In fact, nobody could provide the repair rate of previous generation scissor keyboards, so it wasn't even possible to make a comparison. 

waveparticle said:

charlesatlas said:

waveparticle said:

I capture screen shots often. The new function keys should make this task easier. I never use the esc key, I do not know when it is needed. 

The escape key is quite useful. You're missing out on a lot. For instance, how would you force quit a hung application without command-option-ESC? Go through the hassle of opening Activity Monitor first? It's also good for stopping web pages from loading without resorting to the X button. And most of all, virtually all dialog boxes accept ESC as cancel. I'm guessing you're a mouse-only person who doesn't like keyboard shortcuts.

I force quit application very often. In the apple menu, the keyboard equivalent of force quit is not the ESC key.