re: Help me choose between 2 laptops.

quote:

---

They won't notice, because no one who is evenly remotely interested in gaming would get an Apple computer to "game" on.

---

I know... but I was trying to, well, be neutrally honest.

quote:

---

Nearly double the battery life on a LAPTOP is "meh"?

---

there is a diminishing returns on battery life after a certain point. he's saying that both have battery to last until prior to that point. so apple going beyond that really isn't that important. how often is a regular person running a laptop for 10+ hours without charging? it should be very rare

quote:

---

you have to admit that almost all laptop users find this very useful...and desirable.

---

maybe complete idiots and/or airheads who also have their phone constantly sub-25% battery. for normal people? naw

I just got my M1 macbook air today and holy shite, its insanely powerful. I have like 20 chrome tabs open, excel models, powerpoints, and its not even breaking a sweat for an ultrabook that cost 1k

Oh and you could use it all day and not need to plug in till you go to bed. The battery life is crazy.

The hype is real.

quote:

---

I just got my M1 macbook air today and holy shite, its insanely powerful. I have like 20 chrome tabs open, excel models, powerpoints, and its not even breaking a sweat for an ultrabook that cost 1k

---

Not to be a dick, but that's kind of a low bar. I'm running a ~2012 era thinkpad that cost $850 back then, and I've got chrome with 29 tabs, firefox with 3 tabs, 3 different IDEs, a spreadsheet, gimp, and 7 terminal windows open running a variety of processes. I've got all the frou-frou KDE desktop effects turned on, and still everything I do happens instantly.

Of course, I am running Linux. If it takes the fastest chip ever built to handle a browser and a couple office apps, I think there's something deep and fundamentally wrong with the OS.

quote:

---

Does it have an 12 hour battery life and is extremely portable?

You have to understand everything I'm saying is in the context of being an ultrabook.

---

I understand, but it's still a laptop and I would expect any laptop to easily handle the workload you've described.

I'm not an Apple person, and I really dislike almost everything about their products. But I understand that is personal preference and a lot of people like them.

What I don't understand is when Apple people are amazed talking about how "fast" the latest machine is. I've used brand new macbooks before (including pros), and besides not liking the UI the only thing that ever struck me about them was how sluggish they are. Things that should just *happen* often take 2-3 seconds. I have some cross-platform code that builds in about a minute and a half on this 2012 thinkpad, and a late 2014 mac mini spends 5-6 minutes crunching the same code. Maybe the language and/or code isn't optimized for mac, but that anecdote jives with every other experience I've had with macs over the last 20+ years. Everything feels like a chore.

I've always just assumed that I had bad luck or something, or that I exclusively do oddball tasks that the OS isn't optimized for, because Apple fans always talk about how fast they are. But then you seem impressed when the latest and greatest world-beater can run a browser and a couple productivity apps at the same time, going so far as to qualify it as being an ultrabook as if to set expectations lower.

I don't know, man, it just seems like the expectations of Apple users are skewed.

quote:

---

Well all the comparisons test to Intel chips show just how fast it is. It's not just Macboy's imaginations.

---

Benchmarks? The chip in this 2014 mac mini benchmarks 20% faster than the one in my 2012 thinkpad, but like I said similar tasks take 3-4X longer on the mac. That's why I said there must be something fundamentally wrong with the OS.

Oh Windows has its fair share of fundamental problems, too. I mean how many "repair" functions are there in Windows? There is a "repair" function when the machine won't boot, you can "repair" a fricked install of Office, etc. Like at no point in designing and coding these repair features did no one stop to ask "hey why is shite just breaking all the time?" And I've never seen any of them actually fix anything.

There are all sorts of services that Windows runs that try to speed up this or that, but inevitably whatever process is used to speed something up will clog up and drag down the whole system. Again, at no point in building a new service to make something faster did anyone have the bright idea to fix whatever is slow?



I guess I'm just spoiled by Linux.

quote:

---

The new M1 chip Mac is blazing fast & blows away any windows laptop.

---

1) I don't believe that the M1 chip is faster than any Intel chip. In fact it has recently been proven that the new Intel EVO chips perform everyday tasks considerably quicker than the M1 laptops. The EVO also scored higher on just about every task in Chrome (aka the app that most people use 80% of the time they are in front of their computer).

2) Even if it is true the sheer shite show that is Big Sur and the absolute marvel that is Windows 10 basically cancels it out....I mean it's just not close.

quote:

---

the absolute marvel that is Windows 10 basically cancels it out.

---

With that statement I'm out of this thread...you just lost all credibility if you call that ugly arse mickey mouse mess of an interface an absolute marvel.

ETA. BTW I have 6 computers at my Office running Windows 10, so I know what a shite show it is.