nht

About

Username
nht
Joined
Visits
115
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
2,007
Badges
1
Posts
4,522

Reactions

1.4KLike121Informative

  • M1X Mac mini will be thinner, use iMac's magnetic power connector says leaker

    nhtnht
    I would prefer that they use USB-C PD for power even if it uses up a port.

    Then you can use any sufficiently sized USB-C power supply to power the mini including a dock or a monitor.  Just include the same brick that charges the MBA (or MBP if it needs it).

    One cable from monitor to mini for power, video/audio and additional USB ports.
    watto_cobra

  • A 24-inch 4K monitor & Mac mini is a good option versus the Apple Silicon iMac

    nhtnht
    auxio said:
    trifid said:
    "Versatility versus style" Really? Yea I agree, Mac Mini with a decent 27" blows the new iMac out of the water in terms of style.


    Where's the webcam and the speakers?  Also conveniently forgot the wires between the mini and the monitor.  Once you include all of that, and move it out of a dedicated office space (as many people don't have), you realize that getting rid of the clutter isn't just a "style" choice.
    Good cable management and camera angle.

    There are 4K monitors with USB-C connectivity for video that also has a hub built it. The webcam can work off of that.  Likewise many have an audio jack but speakers can be wireless.  

    With a vesa mount and a Y power cable you could only have one wire leaving the monitor for power with everything else hidden by the cable management system.
    trifid

  • A 24-inch 4K monitor & Mac mini is a good option versus the Apple Silicon iMac

    nhtnht
    I use a 4K 43” Sony tv as a monitor at 4K resolution because I want the screen real estate and 4K 27” is sufficiently tiny that I run that scaled which reduces the desktop size.

    The M1 mini is a far better bang for the buck than the iMac this generation.  My suspicions is that we won’t see a M2 mini and those will be a MBP and iMac option only.

    One thing I wish that the Macs would get is the color calibration that the aTV has.  I don’t do a lot color work anymore but it would be nice for the occasional video editing.
    watto_cobra

  • Apple's 'M2' processor enters mass production for MacBook Pro

    nhtnht
    elijahg said:
    nht said:
    elijahg said:

    What disadvantages to you would the ability to add more RAM or storage space to a desktop machine bring? I await your reply, but I doubt you will since you never concede when asked something awkward. 

    The disadvantage is that it would be slower than the implementation in the M1 where the memory is in the package and “unified” to the processor.

    More storage is just cost. $800 is a bit steep for 2TB but I can get an external 2TB Samsung T7 for about $300.  I can do a single nvme 2TB ssd in a thunderbolt enclosure for not much more. 512MB is reasonable to host the OS and apps and for a desktop the mini with an external nvme based 4 ssd thunderbolt 3 RAID will be very speedy.  Perhaps not as speedy as some the benchmarks for the M1 mini but that’s another trade off.  If you want high speed storage then $800 may be a fair price given the performance.
    So using slow swap and wearing out the soldered SSD is better than having slightly slower RAM off-package which won't run out? They're going to have to have RAM off-package for the >16GB models, else the package would be gigantic and you'd lose the advantage of on-package RAM anyway.

    A TB enclosure with the same data transfer rate (4 lanes) as the internal SSD is $139, which is quite a bit more, and results in one of the whole two USB ports in use on the iMacs. That doesn't actually answer the second part of my question though, which was "What disadvantages to you would the ability to add more storage space to a desktop machine bring?" That was in the context of internal storage, to be clear.
    Yes you can use a larger package to get more than 16GB in a package if required.

    You can also use 2 M1s for double the RAM.  For most use cases where multiple cores are off doing other things (like having a gazillion web pages open) there’s no loss of performance.

    Only if you needed more than 16GB at a time would you see a speed decrease from needing to access ram from the other package.

    And your quote clearly says RAM and storage.  Not just storage.

    The M1 Macs seem to have faster storage access than the T2 Macs.  How much of this is due to them being able to optimize the controller with the SSD chips used and how much is just the controller and chips themselves is TBD.  So the disadvantage in allowing for an internal user replaceable SSD in the mini is possibly slower SSD performance overall.

    In any case, it’s a non issue to use external storage on the Mini so not having user upgradable SSD in the mini is minor.

    If the 1st gen M1 Macs suffer from excessive wear and short life on the SSD then my expectation is that Apple will fix it.

    My suspicion is that it’s a Rosetta issue and a couple apps causing a lot of swap to get used.
    williamlondonwatto_cobra

  • Apple's 'M2' processor enters mass production for MacBook Pro

    nhtnht
    elijahg said:
    nht said:
    elijahg said:
    nht said:
    elijahg said:

    Your business is one data point, the business I worked at had about 200 Macs and we would buy the base config. I personally upgraded the RAM in each machine, saving around $150 on Apple's prices. It took about 5 minutes per Mac, and about $400 of my time to do so for all 200 Macs. 
    Lol.  You updated 200 Macs in 16 hours.  Right.

    And your billable rate is $25 an hour.  Mkay.
    How is that so hard to believe? Remember Macs of yore didn't need to be completely disassembled to upgrade the RAM (I know, right?? how novel!). The RAM slot was under the chin, a single 2.5mm Allen key allowed access, out with the old RAM and in with the new. 5 minutes at most. The 27" iMacs are barely more difficult now. If you had a clue you'd know it's a 5 minute job.

    Not a "billable rate", I was not a contractor.
    I have a clue because I’ve moved a hundred or so Macs before as a volunteer.

    And you didn’t boot to make sure it still worked?  Nice.
    Moving "a hundred or so Macs" is somehow equivalent to upgrading their RAM? Well next time I post a Mac to someone, I'll make note to expect a RAM upgrade mid-transit by the courier.

    Since I was installing the RAM before I imaged the machines from our Xserves, yes I did boot them to make sure it worked. You don't need to wait for one machine to finish starting up before you begin installing RAM on the next.
    Because logistically staging and moving a couple hundred machines around takes a lot of space.  Even if all you’re doing is moving to a central area since they were replaced en mass and are now getting final inventory before excessed.  It takes a lot less time to check an inventory sticker and make sure each machine has a keyboard mouse and power cords and still boots than it does to replace ram and still boot and it still took longer to do than 16 staff hours.

    While you can boot them in parallel there are only so many we could do at a time due to space and power.

    Upgrading 5 machines is easy.  200 is a pain in the ass.  Just stacking 200 new iMacs somewhere fills a large work area.

    if you are only doing a few machines at a time and flow it into initial build you can bury the task since imaging takes the lion’s share of the time.
    williamlondonwatto_cobra