[NEWS] Apple releases M3 MacBook Air models

The differentiator has never been the CPU.

--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)

Alan Browne

2024-03-05 14:12:45 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line. :-\
   Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
   <https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
   Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.

The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

16 GB is barely adequate and 24 GB is the most you can get. And
compared to commodity value of memory (even of this level), it's grossly
expensive. Worse for SSD.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Joerg Lorenz

2024-03-05 14:26:58 UTC

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

--
"Manus manum lavat."

Alan Browne

2024-03-05 19:52:40 UTC

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

dgb (David)

2024-03-05 20:42:04 UTC

Post by Alan Browne
Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

I have 27 inch iMac. I've looked and played with a new M3 iMac in our local
Apple Store.

When you have each one of them there in front of you, regardless of the
technicalities, which screen do you prefer to be sitting in front of? How does
each make you /feel/ please?

Alan Browne

2024-03-05 21:17:11 UTC

Post by Alan Browne
Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

I have 27 inch iMac. I've looked and played with a new M3 iMac in our local
Apple Store.
When you have each one of them there in front of you, regardless of the
technicalities, which screen do you prefer to be sitting in front of? How does
each make you /feel/ please?

Hard to answer.

The resolution quality of the M3 iMac is to the point where pixels
cannot be resolved with the naked eye. It is magnificently crisp and
contrast perfect at the default setting of 2240 x 1260. All fonts look
perfectly smooth. Very easy on the eyes.

It is usable at 2560 x 1440, but only if the screen is pretty close (at
least with my eyes - I don't need glasses to read, but this rez on the
24" iMac is just a little too tight (unless I would increase font sizes
which would be pretty much a return to the other resolution)). This is
likely more a personal thing so YMMV.

4480 x 2520 is not usable, really. Again one could blow up the font
sizes for reading - but not much point to it. Perhaps in some graphics
usages and workflow this would be a useful resolution.

I would have preferred 27". On the i7 iMac 27", 2560x1440 and it's very
nice. Lean in and you can see pixels. Lean in mind you. It's a very
nice display on that old 2012 iMac (not Retina). For all non-video
work, the 2012 iMac suited my needs just fine.

Still a killer processor. But.

When editing/rendering 1080p video of any length, it is too tedious.
Such on the M3 iMac is a whiz. (Though I still wish it was a higher
spec in number of cores). As a benchmark, it is almost 3x faster to
Handbrake a video on the M3 v. the i7 iMac (2012).

At some point I will gut the 27" of everything but the power supply and
display panel and add an adaptor to turn it into an HDMI or DisplayPort
display.

So in the end one makes adjustments to "real estate" on the screen,
sizing of App windows, what goes to the side display (which I've changed
to a Samsung 27" that I normally use for home lab use (Rasp Pi
development). It's so wide, that I only use the right 60% of it when
using this iMac M3).

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

dgb (David)

2024-03-05 22:07:29 UTC

Post by Alan Browne
Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

I have 27 inch iMac. I've looked and played with a new M3 iMac in our local
Apple Store.
When you have each one of them there in front of you, regardless of the
technicalities, which screen do you prefer to be sitting in front of? How does
each make you /feel/ please?

Hard to answer.
The resolution quality of the M3 iMac is to the point where pixels
cannot be resolved with the naked eye. It is magnificently crisp and
contrast perfect at the default setting of 2240 x 1260. All fonts look
perfectly smooth. Very easy on the eyes.
It is usable at 2560 x 1440, but only if the screen is pretty close (at
least with my eyes - I don't need glasses to read, but this rez on the
24" iMac is just a little too tight (unless I would increase font sizes
which would be pretty much a return to the other resolution)). This is
likely more a personal thing so YMMV.
4480 x 2520 is not usable, really. Again one could blow up the font
sizes for reading - but not much point to it. Perhaps in some graphics
usages and workflow this would be a useful resolution.
I would have preferred 27". On the i7 iMac 27", 2560x1440 and it's very
nice. Lean in and you can see pixels. Lean in mind you. It's a very
nice display on that old 2012 iMac (not Retina). For all non-video
work, the 2012 iMac suited my needs just fine.
Still a killer processor. But.
When editing/rendering 1080p video of any length, it is too tedious.
Such on the M3 iMac is a whiz. (Though I still wish it was a higher
spec in number of cores). As a benchmark, it is almost 3x faster to
Handbrake a video on the M3 v. the i7 iMac (2012).
At some point I will gut the 27" of everything but the power supply and
display panel and add an adaptor to turn it into an HDMI or DisplayPort
display.
So in the end one makes adjustments to "real estate" on the screen,
sizing of App windows, what goes to the side display (which I've changed
to a Samsung 27" that I normally use for home lab use (Rasp Pi
development). It's so wide, that I only use the right 60% of it when
using this iMac M3).

Thank you so much for all the interesting detail, Alan.

My own is a 2017 iMac with a Retina display and I really don't want to change
it.
However, I'm using macOS Ventura 13.6.4 and cannot move on to Sonoma.
I'm living in the hope that Apple may one day provide another 27 inch desktop
computer before this one dies! I'm also using an old 24 inch iMac to run Linux
Mint and it does this quite well.
I'm impressed with your intention to repurpose your old iMac!
Good for you! :-)

(ACW added for info to others)

--
David

Alan Browne

2024-03-05 23:08:04 UTC

Post by Alan Browne
Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

I have 27 inch iMac. I've looked and played with a new M3 iMac in our local
Apple Store.
When you have each one of them there in front of you, regardless of the
technicalities, which screen do you prefer to be sitting in front of? How does
each make you /feel/ please?

Hard to answer.
The resolution quality of the M3 iMac is to the point where pixels
cannot be resolved with the naked eye. It is magnificently crisp and
contrast perfect at the default setting of 2240 x 1260. All fonts look
perfectly smooth. Very easy on the eyes.
It is usable at 2560 x 1440, but only if the screen is pretty close (at
least with my eyes - I don't need glasses to read, but this rez on the
24" iMac is just a little too tight (unless I would increase font sizes
which would be pretty much a return to the other resolution)). This is
likely more a personal thing so YMMV.
4480 x 2520 is not usable, really. Again one could blow up the font
sizes for reading - but not much point to it. Perhaps in some graphics
usages and workflow this would be a useful resolution.
I would have preferred 27". On the i7 iMac 27", 2560x1440 and it's very
nice. Lean in and you can see pixels. Lean in mind you. It's a very
nice display on that old 2012 iMac (not Retina). For all non-video
work, the 2012 iMac suited my needs just fine.
Still a killer processor. But.
When editing/rendering 1080p video of any length, it is too tedious.
Such on the M3 iMac is a whiz. (Though I still wish it was a higher
spec in number of cores). As a benchmark, it is almost 3x faster to
Handbrake a video on the M3 v. the i7 iMac (2012).
At some point I will gut the 27" of everything but the power supply and
display panel and add an adaptor to turn it into an HDMI or DisplayPort
display.
So in the end one makes adjustments to "real estate" on the screen,
sizing of App windows, what goes to the side display (which I've changed
to a Samsung 27" that I normally use for home lab use (Rasp Pi
development). It's so wide, that I only use the right 60% of it when
using this iMac M3).

Thank you so much for all the interesting detail, Alan.

Hope it helps you.

Post by dgb (David)
My own is a 2017 iMac with a Retina display and I really don't want to change
it.

I'd consider that to be a pretty good rig.

There are ways to load up to date OS' on older machines such as:
https://dortania.github.io/OpenCore-Legacy-Patcher/

(I'm not sure if that is the best way - do YOUR research before diving
in. More importantly do a full backup first!).

Post by dgb (David)
However, I'm using macOS Ventura 13.6.4 and cannot move on to Sonoma.
I'm living in the hope that Apple may one day provide another 27 inch desktop
computer before this one dies! I'm also using an old 24 inch iMac to run Linux
Mint and it does this quite well.

I'm out of Linux projects at present. OTOH, I can't get Ubuntu to run
properly on the M3 under Fusion. (It works - but I can't drag files
into or out of it. Will need to network it instead).

My Pi project can be cross-compiled on the i7 or M3, so don't need Linux
much.

Post by dgb (David)
I'm impressed with your intention to repurpose your old iMac!
Good for you! :-)

It's a nice display! And maybe someone will want the motherboard and
RAM from the iMac. (I doubt it...).

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Your Name

2024-03-06 04:45:43 UTC

Post by Alan Browne
Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

I have 27 inch iMac. I've looked and played with a new M3 iMac in our local
Apple Store.
When you have each one of them there in front of you, regardless of the
technicalities, which screen do you prefer to be sitting in front of? How does
each make you /feel/ please?

Hard to answer.
The resolution quality of the M3 iMac is to the point where pixels
cannot be resolved with the naked eye. It is magnificently crisp and
contrast perfect at the default setting of 2240 x 1260. All fonts look
perfectly smooth. Very easy on the eyes.
It is usable at 2560 x 1440, but only if the screen is pretty close (at
least with my eyes - I don't need glasses to read, but this rez on the
24" iMac is just a little too tight (unless I would increase font sizes
which would be pretty much a return to the other resolution)). This is
likely more a personal thing so YMMV.
4480 x 2520 is not usable, really. Again one could blow up the font
sizes for reading - but not much point to it. Perhaps in some graphics
usages and workflow this would be a useful resolution.
I would have preferred 27". On the i7 iMac 27", 2560x1440 and it's very
nice. Lean in and you can see pixels. Lean in mind you. It's a very
nice display on that old 2012 iMac (not Retina). For all non-video
work, the 2012 iMac suited my needs just fine.
Still a killer processor. But.
When editing/rendering 1080p video of any length, it is too tedious.
Such on the M3 iMac is a whiz. (Though I still wish it was a higher
spec in number of cores). As a benchmark, it is almost 3x faster to
Handbrake a video on the M3 v. the i7 iMac (2012).
At some point I will gut the 27" of everything but the power supply and
display panel and add an adaptor to turn it into an HDMI or DisplayPort
display.
So in the end one makes adjustments to "real estate" on the screen,
sizing of App windows, what goes to the side display (which I've changed
to a Samsung 27" that I normally use for home lab use (Rasp Pi
development). It's so wide, that I only use the right 60% of it when
using this iMac M3).

Thank you so much for all the interesting detail, Alan.
My own is a 2017 iMac with a Retina display and I really don't want to change
it.
However, I'm using macOS Ventura 13.6.4 and cannot move on to Sonoma.
I'm living in the hope that Apple may one day provide another 27 inch desktop
computer before this one dies! I'm also using an old 24 inch iMac to run Linux
Mint and it does this quite well.
I'm impressed with your intention to repurpose your old iMac!
Good for you! :-)
(ACW added for info to others)

The current reports say Apple are not planning on making a new 27in
iMac or iMac Pro any time soon. There are dubious rumours that pop up
from time to time, including going to 32in iMac.

You could of course buy a Mac Mini or Mac Studio and add whatever
screen size you want. Not an "all-in-one", but depending on the
screen's base or using a display stand, it can almost be.

dgb (David)

2024-03-06 08:07:38 UTC

Post by Alan Browne
Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

I have 27 inch iMac. I've looked and played with a new M3 iMac in our local
Apple Store.
When you have each one of them there in front of you, regardless of the
technicalities, which screen do you prefer to be sitting in front of? How does
each make you /feel/ please?

Hard to answer.
The resolution quality of the M3 iMac is to the point where pixels
cannot be resolved with the naked eye. It is magnificently crisp and
contrast perfect at the default setting of 2240 x 1260. All fonts look
perfectly smooth. Very easy on the eyes.
It is usable at 2560 x 1440, but only if the screen is pretty close (at
least with my eyes - I don't need glasses to read, but this rez on the
24" iMac is just a little too tight (unless I would increase font sizes
which would be pretty much a return to the other resolution)). This is
likely more a personal thing so YMMV.
4480 x 2520 is not usable, really. Again one could blow up the font
sizes for reading - but not much point to it. Perhaps in some graphics
usages and workflow this would be a useful resolution.
I would have preferred 27". On the i7 iMac 27", 2560x1440 and it's very
nice. Lean in and you can see pixels. Lean in mind you. It's a very
nice display on that old 2012 iMac (not Retina). For all non-video
work, the 2012 iMac suited my needs just fine.
Still a killer processor. But.
When editing/rendering 1080p video of any length, it is too tedious.
Such on the M3 iMac is a whiz. (Though I still wish it was a higher
spec in number of cores). As a benchmark, it is almost 3x faster to
Handbrake a video on the M3 v. the i7 iMac (2012).
At some point I will gut the 27" of everything but the power supply and
display panel and add an adaptor to turn it into an HDMI or DisplayPort
display.
So in the end one makes adjustments to "real estate" on the screen,
sizing of App windows, what goes to the side display (which I've changed
to a Samsung 27" that I normally use for home lab use (Rasp Pi
development). It's so wide, that I only use the right 60% of it when
using this iMac M3).

Thank you so much for all the interesting detail, Alan.
My own is a 2017 iMac with a Retina display and I really don't want to change
it.
However, I'm using macOS Ventura 13.6.4 and cannot move on to Sonoma.
I'm living in the hope that Apple may one day provide another 27 inch desktop
computer before this one dies! I'm also using an old 24 inch iMac to run Linux
Mint and it does this quite well.
I'm impressed with your intention to repurpose your old iMac!
Good for you! :-)
(ACW added for info to others)

The current reports say Apple are not planning on making a new 27in
iMac or iMac Pro any time soon. There are dubious rumours that pop up
from time to time, including going to 32in iMac.

That is my understanding too.

Post by Your Name
You could of course buy a Mac Mini or Mac Studio and add whatever
screen size you want. Not an "all-in-one", but depending on the
screen's base or using a display stand, it can almost be.

My Professor friend has done exactly that!
The Studio Display is just wonderful - but expensive!
With iCloud storage being relatively cheap, there's no (apparent) need to have
lots of on-board storage nowadays.

Jolly Roger

2024-03-06 16:23:38 UTC

Post by Your Name
The current reports say Apple are not planning on making a new 27in
iMac or iMac Pro any time soon. There are dubious rumours that pop up
from time to time, including going to 32in iMac.

That is my understanding too.

My Professor friend has done exactly that! The Studio Display is just
wonderful - but expensive!

Best display I've ever owned. I have it sitting next to a 5K LG
UltraFine display, and it's striking how much better the Studio Display
is in just about every way: color accuracy, viewing angle, backlight
consistency, overall build quality, audio quality, and camera quality.
It's worth every penny I paid for it.

Post by dgb (David)
With iCloud storage being relatively cheap, there's no (apparent) need
to have lots of on-board storage nowadays.

Personally, I can't really function without at least 2 TB of internal
storage, but I know I'm not representative of the average user.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

pothead

2024-03-06 17:25:25 UTC

Post by Jolly Roger

That is my understanding too.

My Professor friend has done exactly that! The Studio Display is just
wonderful - but expensive!

Post by dgb (David)
With iCloud storage being relatively cheap, there's no (apparent) need
to have lots of on-board storage nowadays.

Personally, I can't really function without at least 2 TB of internal
storage, but I know I'm not representative of the average user.

It's an amazing display. Super clear, bright vivid colors and easy on the eyes. Even looking at
monitors in the big box stores where nothing tends to be adjusted properly, Apple monitors look
fantastic. I do think part of it has to do with the fonts Apple uses. I don't know for sure though.

--
pothead
Tommy Chong For President 2024.
Crazy Joe Biden Is A Demented Imbecile.
Impeach Joe Biden 2022.

dgb (David)

2024-03-13 07:55:52 UTC

Desktop & Documents Folders in iCloud Drive

An explanation for "Jolly Roger"!

https://eclecticlight.co/2024/03/13/desktop-documents-folders-in-icloud-drive/

I hope this helps!

--
David

Jolly Roger

2024-03-13 16:40:07 UTC

Post by dgb (David)
Desktop & Documents Folders in iCloud Drive
An explanation for "Jolly Roger"!

I know more about iCloud Drive than you ever will, dumbo.

Post by dgb (David)
I hope this helps!

Your link doesn't dispute anything I've said about the topic. Fuck off.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

dgb (David)

2024-03-13 17:10:10 UTC

Post by dgb (David)
Desktop & Documents Folders in iCloud Drive
An explanation for "Jolly Roger"!

I know more about iCloud Drive than you ever will.

I didn't write the article. Do you think you know as much as Howard Oakley?

Post by dgb (David)
I hope this helps!

Your link doesn't dispute anything I've said about the topic.

Then help me with this, please.

In Terminal, type " system_profiler " (no quotes)
and let it run.

In the generated output do you see an entry like this?

/Library/HTTPStorages/com.apple.ctcategories.service

And/or

/Library/HTTPStorages/com.apple.ctcategories.service

Please advise.

Thanks.

Alan

2024-03-13 17:46:43 UTC

Post by dgb (David)
Desktop & Documents Folders in iCloud Drive
An explanation for "Jolly Roger"!

I know more about iCloud Drive than you ever will.

I didn't write the article. Do you think you know as much as Howard Oakley?

Post by dgb (David)
I hope this helps!

Your link doesn't dispute anything I've said about the topic.

Then help me with this, please.

Why would anyone help an asshole like you?

Jolly Roger

2024-03-14 00:03:16 UTC

Post by dgb (David)
Desktop & Documents Folders in iCloud Drive
An explanation for "Jolly Roger"!

I know more about iCloud Drive than you ever will.

I didn't write the article.

I don't give a shit.

Post by dgb (David)
I hope this helps!

Your link doesn't dispute anything I've said about the topic.

Then help me with this, please.

Nah. Fuck off.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

Your Name

2024-03-06 20:55:46 UTC

Post by Alan Browne
Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

I have 27 inch iMac. I've looked and played with a new M3 iMac in our
local Apple Store.
When you have each one of them there in front of you, regardless of the
technicalities, which screen do you prefer to be sitting in front of?
How does each make you /feel/ please?

Hard to answer.
The resolution quality of the M3 iMac is to the point where pixels
cannot be resolved with the naked eye. It is magnificently crisp and
contrast perfect at the default setting of 2240 x 1260. All fonts look
perfectly smooth. Very easy on the eyes.
It is usable at 2560 x 1440, but only if the screen is pretty close (at
least with my eyes - I don't need glasses to read, but this rez on the
24" iMac is just a little too tight (unless I would increase font sizes
which would be pretty much a return to the other resolution)). This is
likely more a personal thing so YMMV.
4480 x 2520 is not usable, really. Again one could blow up the font
sizes for reading - but not much point to it. Perhaps in some graphics
usages and workflow this would be a useful resolution.
I would have preferred 27". On the i7 iMac 27", 2560x1440 and it's very
nice. Lean in and you can see pixels. Lean in mind you. It's a very
nice display on that old 2012 iMac (not Retina). For all non-video
work, the 2012 iMac suited my needs just fine.
Still a killer processor. But.
When editing/rendering 1080p video of any length, it is too tedious.
Such on the M3 iMac is a whiz. (Though I still wish it was a higher
spec in number of cores). As a benchmark, it is almost 3x faster to
Handbrake a video on the M3 v. the i7 iMac (2012).
At some point I will gut the 27" of everything but the power supply and
display panel and add an adaptor to turn it into an HDMI or DisplayPort
display.
So in the end one makes adjustments to "real estate" on the screen,
sizing of App windows, what goes to the side display (which I've changed
to a Samsung 27" that I normally use for home lab use (Rasp Pi
development). It's so wide, that I only use the right 60% of it when
using this iMac M3).

Thank you so much for all the interesting detail, Alan.
My own is a 2017 iMac with a Retina display and I really don't want to
change it. However, I'm using macOS Ventura 13.6.4 and cannot move on
to Sonoma. I'm living in the hope that Apple may one day provide
another 27 inch desktop computer before this one dies! I'm also using
an old 24 inch iMac to run Linux Mint and it does this quite well. I'm
impressed with your intention to repurpose your old iMac! Good for you!
:-)
(ACW added for info to others)

The current reports say Apple are not planning on making a new 27in
iMac or iMac Pro any time soon. There are dubious rumours that pop up
from time to time, including going to 32in iMac.

That is my understanding too.

You can buy a build-to-order Mac Mini or Mac Studio with up to 8TB
internal storage from the Apple Store or a reseller ... if your bank
account can stand it.

Long gone are the good old days of easily being able to add RAM or
change drives or graphics cards in a Mac. It not even possible in the
so-called "Mac Pro tower", making that just another pointless Mac
model. :-(

dgb (David)

2024-03-06 21:20:12 UTC

Post by Alan Browne
Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

I have 27 inch iMac. I've looked and played with a new M3 iMac in our
local Apple Store.
When you have each one of them there in front of you, regardless of the
technicalities, which screen do you prefer to be sitting in front of?
How does each make you /feel/ please?

Hard to answer.
The resolution quality of the M3 iMac is to the point where pixels
cannot be resolved with the naked eye. It is magnificently crisp and
contrast perfect at the default setting of 2240 x 1260. All fonts look
perfectly smooth. Very easy on the eyes.
It is usable at 2560 x 1440, but only if the screen is pretty close (at
least with my eyes - I don't need glasses to read, but this rez on the
24" iMac is just a little too tight (unless I would increase font sizes
which would be pretty much a return to the other resolution)). This is
likely more a personal thing so YMMV.
4480 x 2520 is not usable, really. Again one could blow up the font
sizes for reading - but not much point to it. Perhaps in some graphics
usages and workflow this would be a useful resolution.
I would have preferred 27". On the i7 iMac 27", 2560x1440 and it's very
nice. Lean in and you can see pixels. Lean in mind you. It's a very
nice display on that old 2012 iMac (not Retina). For all non-video
work, the 2012 iMac suited my needs just fine.
Still a killer processor. But.
When editing/rendering 1080p video of any length, it is too tedious.
Such on the M3 iMac is a whiz. (Though I still wish it was a higher
spec in number of cores). As a benchmark, it is almost 3x faster to
Handbrake a video on the M3 v. the i7 iMac (2012).
At some point I will gut the 27" of everything but the power supply and
display panel and add an adaptor to turn it into an HDMI or DisplayPort
display.
So in the end one makes adjustments to "real estate" on the screen,
sizing of App windows, what goes to the side display (which I've changed
to a Samsung 27" that I normally use for home lab use (Rasp Pi
development). It's so wide, that I only use the right 60% of it when
using this iMac M3).

Thank you so much for all the interesting detail, Alan.
My own is a 2017 iMac with a Retina display and I really don't want to
change it. However, I'm using macOS Ventura 13.6.4 and cannot move on
to Sonoma. I'm living in the hope that Apple may one day provide
another 27 inch desktop computer before this one dies! I'm also using
an old 24 inch iMac to run Linux Mint and it does this quite well. I'm
impressed with your intention to repurpose your old iMac! Good for you!
:-)
(ACW added for info to others)

The current reports say Apple are not planning on making a new 27in
iMac or iMac Pro any time soon. There are dubious rumours that pop up
from time to time, including going to 32in iMac.

That is my understanding too.

You can buy a build-to-order Mac Mini or Mac Studio with up to 8TB
internal storage from the Apple Store or a reseller ... if your bank
account can stand it.

Ha! Understood. :-)

Post by Your Name
Long gone are the good old days of easily being able to add RAM or
change drives or graphics cards in a Mac. It not even possible in the
so-called "Mac Pro tower", making that just another pointless Mac
model. :-(

Thank you for emphasising that. Many folk get caught out by this.

Alan

2024-03-05 21:50:32 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

Post the screenshots.

Alan Browne

2024-03-05 23:22:27 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

Post the screenshots.

Go buy an Apple Silicon Mac and find out for yourself.

Or look up the numerous articles online that discuss the same thing.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Alan

2024-03-06 00:17:54 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

Post the screenshots.

Go buy an Apple Silicon Mac and find out for yourself.
Or look up the numerous articles online that discuss the same thing.

Sorry, but given how easy it would be to post screenshots and you
punking out on doing so...

...I'll take what you've claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

:-)

Jörg Lorenz

2024-03-06 09:08:47 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

Post the screenshots.

Go buy an Apple Silicon Mac and find out for yourself.
Or look up the numerous articles online that discuss the same thing.

Sorry, but given how easy it would be to post screenshots and you
punking out on doing so...
...I'll take what you've claimed with a (large) grain of salt.
:-)

He is totally lacking credibility.

--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)

Alan Browne

2024-03-06 22:14:25 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

Post the screenshots.

Go buy an Apple Silicon Mac and find out for yourself.
Or look up the numerous articles online that discuss the same thing.

Sorry, but given how easy it would be to post screenshots and you
punking out on doing so...
...I'll take what you've claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Imagine my consternation.

Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Alan

2024-03-06 22:24:05 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line.
:-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load
of apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds
yours on this - as it does on most subjects.

Post the screenshots.

Go buy an Apple Silicon Mac and find out for yourself.
Or look up the numerous articles online that discuss the same thing.

Sorry, but given how easy it would be to post screenshots and you
punking out on doing so...
...I'll take what you've claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Imagine my consternation.
Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

The numbers are what you CLAIM to have seen...

...but won't show screenshots to corroborate.

Alan Browne

2024-03-07 22:16:50 UTC

claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Post by Alan Browne
Imagine my consternation.
Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

The numbers are what you CLAIM to have seen...
...but won't show screenshots to corroborate.

I have no obligation to do so.

What you can do is go get your self an Apple Si Mac and see for yourself.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Alan

2024-03-08 01:36:00 UTC

Post by Alan
claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Post by Alan Browne
Imagine my consternation.
Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

The numbers are what you CLAIM to have seen...
...but won't show screenshots to corroborate.

I have no obligation to do so.

Good. You're bright enough to know that.

Are you bright enough to understand that the onus to support a claim is
on the one who MAKES the claim?

Or that when someone refuses to do something simple to support a claim...

...it makes others think he has something to hide?

<https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gBtTjBw9RZdogtopDdJjyYiMzO1-yPAK/view?usp=share_link>

Alan Browne

2024-03-08 21:45:52 UTC

Post by Alan
claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Post by Alan Browne
Imagine my consternation.
Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

The numbers are what you CLAIM to have seen...
...but won't show screenshots to corroborate.

I have no obligation to do so.

Good. You're bright enough to know that.
Are you bright enough to understand that the onus to support a claim is
on the one who MAKES the claim?

Or if one claims I'm wrong to show so themselves.

Do you own an Apple Silicon Mac? Then you can prove me wrong.

I have nothing to prove to you and I don't care if you don't believe me.
I have the numbers in front of me. And that's just the facts.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Alan

2024-03-09 00:40:47 UTC

Post by Alan
claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Post by Alan Browne
Imagine my consternation.
Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

The numbers are what you CLAIM to have seen...
...but won't show screenshots to corroborate.

I have no obligation to do so.

Good. You're bright enough to know that.
Are you bright enough to understand that the onus to support a claim
is on the one who MAKES the claim?

Or if one claims I'm wrong to show so themselves.

No... ...that's not the way it has ever worked.

Post by Alan Browne
Do you own an Apple Silicon Mac? Then you can prove me wrong.
I have nothing to prove to you and I don't care if you don't believe me.
I have the numbers in front of me. And that's just the facts.

If you actually had the numbers in front of you...

...and you were technically competent (maybe that's the problem)...

...it would be trivial to prove your claims.

But you don't.

Alan Browne

2024-03-09 14:46:39 UTC

Post by Alan
claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Post by Alan Browne
Imagine my consternation.
Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

The numbers are what you CLAIM to have seen...
...but won't show screenshots to corroborate.

I have no obligation to do so.

Good. You're bright enough to know that.
Are you bright enough to understand that the onus to support a claim
is on the one who MAKES the claim?

Or if one claims I'm wrong to show so themselves.

No... ...that's not the way it has ever worked.

Post by Alan Browne
Do you own an Apple Silicon Mac? Then you can prove me wrong.
I have nothing to prove to you and I don't care if you don't believe
me. I have the numbers in front of me. And that's just the facts.

If you actually had the numbers in front of you...
...and you were technically competent (maybe that's the problem)...
...it would be trivial to prove your claims.
But you don't.

I do. I put up the numbers. And that is sufficient. You see: I don't
have to "prove my claim" to you. If you don't believe what I wrote,
then that's entirely, 100%, your problem.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Alan

2024-03-11 16:23:12 UTC

Post by Alan
claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Post by Alan Browne
Imagine my consternation.
Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

The numbers are what you CLAIM to have seen...
...but won't show screenshots to corroborate.

I have no obligation to do so.

Good. You're bright enough to know that.
Are you bright enough to understand that the onus to support a claim
is on the one who MAKES the claim?

Or if one claims I'm wrong to show so themselves.

No... ...that's not the way it has ever worked.

Post by Alan Browne
Do you own an Apple Silicon Mac? Then you can prove me wrong.
I have nothing to prove to you and I don't care if you don't believe
me. I have the numbers in front of me. And that's just the facts.

If you actually had the numbers in front of you...
...and you were technically competent (maybe that's the problem)...
...it would be trivial to prove your claims.
But you don't.

I do. I put up the numbers. And that is sufficient. You see: I don't
have to "prove my claim" to you. If you don't believe what I wrote,
then that's entirely, 100%, your problem.

You writing numbers in a Usenet post is just a nothing, sunshine.

And you certainly don't HAVE to do anything...

...but we're all free to draw the conclusion that if your "numbers"
weren't all bullshit, you'd have simply posted a couple of screenshots
by now.

Bud Frede

2024-03-09 12:49:14 UTC

Post by Alan
claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Post by Alan Browne
Imagine my consternation.
Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

The numbers are what you CLAIM to have seen...
...but won't show screenshots to corroborate.

I have no obligation to do so.
What you can do is go get your self an Apple Si Mac and see for yourself.

I myself would not find 8GB RAM to be enough. However, my wife finds it
to be quite usable on her M1 Macbook Air.

I do prefer more storage than 256GB, but my work MBPs have only had that
much the past several iterations and it's been fine. (I store most
things for work in cloud storage that my workplace provides.)

Theoretically, the tight coupling of CPU, GPU, RAM, and SSD on Apple
Silicon makes it less sensitive to limited amounts of RAM, but we're not
yet at the point where we have really fast persistent storage and can
thus have one big pool of memory/storage. Optane was getting closer to
that, but I think Intel did an "OS/2" (or maybe "PS/2") to it and it
withered on the vine.

My main home computer (the one I'm typing on now) is an M1 Mini with
16GB RAM and 512GB SSD. Would I like more RAM and storage? Yes. I'm ok
without it right now though, and it doesn't get in my way normally.

I'm not really happy with Macs no longer being upgradeable, nor with the
prices that Apple charges for (commodity) items like RAM and
storage. However, this Mini is a pretty amazing little box and I very
much like using it. I can forgive Apple's sins. :-)

I do question why, in 2024, Apple has such paltry amounts of RAM and
storage in their base model products. It doesn't seem fitting for a
premium product.

Alan Browne

2024-03-09 15:27:19 UTC

Post by Alan
claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Post by Alan Browne
Imagine my consternation.
Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

The numbers are what you CLAIM to have seen...
...but won't show screenshots to corroborate.

I have no obligation to do so.
What you can do is go get your self an Apple Si Mac and see for yourself.

It's not all that fantastic as my experience in same setup v. memory
allocation shows.

Past architectures (lower end intel) already had GPU using main memory
on the order of 1 - 2 GB. Other devices used memory mapped IO to some
extent. Of course the current memory bandwidth is very high, so that is
good.

Apple Si "upped the ante" - but the hype from Apple hasn't stood testing.

Post by Bud Frede
yet at the point where we have really fast persistent storage and can
thus have one big pool of memory/storage. Optane was getting closer to
that, but I think Intel did an "OS/2" (or maybe "PS/2") to it and it
withered on the vine.

I fantasized about such back in the 80's ... one day perhaps.

Post by Bud Frede
My main home computer (the one I'm typing on now) is an M1 Mini with
16GB RAM and 512GB SSD. Would I like more RAM and storage? Yes. I'm ok
without it right now though, and it doesn't get in my way normally.

A client loaned me his M2 Mini for a while (reasons) and it had 16 GB
and I don't recall the SSD. Nice machine.

Post by Bud Frede
I'm not really happy with Macs no longer being upgradeable, nor with the
prices that Apple charges for (commodity) items like RAM and
storage. However, this Mini is a pretty amazing little box and I very
much like using it. I can forgive Apple's sins. :-)

Regrettably I'm all in on Apple for my personal use, and very much "in"
for business use. The latter is easier to bury the costs (esp. as a Mac
in the business will be useful for 10 years or more at some posts).

I don't protest so much the memory non-upgradeability of later Macs so
much, but the prices they charge are nuts. This iMac will likely be my
main personal computer for 10 years (given my past history) - so eat the
price.

Also, I bought the M3 with the max 24 GB of RAM. Would have preferred
at least 32, 42 (yes - that's a thing) or 48 GB.

2 TB of SSD should be OK for the long term - I also have 24 TB of
external online storage and 12 TB of rotated backup storage.

Post by Bud Frede
I do question why, in 2024, Apple has such paltry amounts of RAM and
storage in their base model products. It doesn't seem fitting for a
premium product.

Because they are profit whores. The prices they charge for the
commodity memory (RAM and SSD) is outrageous.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Bud Frede

2024-03-09 22:20:15 UTC

Post by Bud Frede
I do question why, in 2024, Apple has such paltry amounts of RAM and
storage in their base model products. It doesn't seem fitting for a
premium product.

Because they are profit whores. The prices they charge for the
commodity memory (RAM and SSD) is outrageous.

My question was a bit rhetorical, but yeah, they bend their customers
over when it comes to RAM and storage.

Alan

2024-03-11 16:24:05 UTC

Post by Alan
claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Post by Alan Browne
Imagine my consternation.
Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

The numbers are what you CLAIM to have seen...
...but won't show screenshots to corroborate.

I have no obligation to do so.
What you can do is go get your self an Apple Si Mac and see for yourself.

It's not all that fantastic as my experience in same setup v. memory
allocation shows.
Past architectures (lower end intel) already had GPU using main memory
on the order of 1 - 2 GB. Other devices used memory mapped IO to some
extent. Of course the current memory bandwidth is very high, so that is
good.
Apple Si "upped the ante" - but the hype from Apple hasn't stood testing.

Testing you won't actually show...

Alan Browne

2024-03-11 21:53:28 UTC

Post by Alan
claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Post by Alan Browne
Imagine my consternation.
Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

The numbers are what you CLAIM to have seen...
...but won't show screenshots to corroborate.

I have no obligation to do so.
What you can do is go get your self an Apple Si Mac and see for yourself.

It's not all that fantastic as my experience in same setup v. memory
allocation shows.
Past architectures (lower end intel) already had GPU using main memory
on the order of 1 - 2 GB. Other devices used memory mapped IO to some
extent. Of course the current memory bandwidth is very high, so that
is good.
Apple Si "upped the ante" - but the hype from Apple hasn't stood testing.

Testing you won't actually show...

Yes or no: Do you have an Apple Si Mac?

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Alan

2024-03-11 22:50:51 UTC

Post by Alan
claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Post by Alan Browne
Imagine my consternation.
Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

The numbers are what you CLAIM to have seen...
...but won't show screenshots to corroborate.

I have no obligation to do so.
What you can do is go get your self an Apple Si Mac and see for yourself.

It's not all that fantastic as my experience in same setup v. memory
allocation shows.
Past architectures (lower end intel) already had GPU using main
memory on the order of 1 - 2 GB. Other devices used memory mapped IO
to some extent. Of course the current memory bandwidth is very high,
so that is good.
Apple Si "upped the ante" - but the hype from Apple hasn't stood testing.

Testing you won't actually show...

Yes or no: Do you have an Apple Si Mac?

Yes or no: could you post screenshots of what you claim you have seen?

Alan Browne

2024-03-11 23:29:08 UTC

Post by Alan
claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Post by Alan Browne
Imagine my consternation.
Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

The numbers are what you CLAIM to have seen...
...but won't show screenshots to corroborate.

I have no obligation to do so.
What you can do is go get your self an Apple Si Mac and see for yourself.

It's not all that fantastic as my experience in same setup v. memory
allocation shows.
Past architectures (lower end intel) already had GPU using main
memory on the order of 1 - 2 GB. Other devices used memory mapped
IO to some extent. Of course the current memory bandwidth is very
high, so that is good.
Apple Si "upped the ante" - but the hype from Apple hasn't stood testing.

Testing you won't actually show...

Yes or no: Do you have an Apple Si Mac?

Yes or no: could you post screenshots of what you claim you have seen?

I guess you don't.

I could post the screen shots. Certainly. Am I obliged?

No. Because: Get over yourself.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Alan

2024-03-12 00:38:34 UTC

Post by Alan
claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Post by Alan Browne
Imagine my consternation.
Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

The numbers are what you CLAIM to have seen...
...but won't show screenshots to corroborate.

I have no obligation to do so.
What you can do is go get your self an Apple Si Mac and see for yourself.

It's not all that fantastic as my experience in same setup v.
memory allocation shows.
Past architectures (lower end intel) already had GPU using main
memory on the order of 1 - 2 GB. Other devices used memory mapped
IO to some extent. Of course the current memory bandwidth is very
high, so that is good.
Apple Si "upped the ante" - but the hype from Apple hasn't stood testing.

Testing you won't actually show...

Yes or no: Do you have an Apple Si Mac?

Yes or no: could you post screenshots of what you claim you have seen?

I guess you don't.
I could post the screen shots. Certainly. Am I obliged?
No. Because: Get over yourself.

"Obliged"? Where did I ever suggest you were "obliged", sunshine?

But you are JUDGED on what you do.

Alan Browne

2024-03-12 22:33:38 UTC

Post by Alan
claimed with a (large) grain of salt.

Post by Alan Browne
Imagine my consternation.
Fact is I have an Apple Silicon iMac and the numbers are plain to see.

The numbers are what you CLAIM to have seen...
...but won't show screenshots to corroborate.

I have no obligation to do so.
What you can do is go get your self an Apple Si Mac and see for yourself.

It's not all that fantastic as my experience in same setup v.
memory allocation shows.
Past architectures (lower end intel) already had GPU using main
memory on the order of 1 - 2 GB. Other devices used memory mapped
IO to some extent. Of course the current memory bandwidth is very
high, so that is good.
Apple Si "upped the ante" - but the hype from Apple hasn't stood testing.

Testing you won't actually show...

Yes or no: Do you have an Apple Si Mac?

Yes or no: could you post screenshots of what you claim you have seen?

I guess you don't.
I could post the screen shots. Certainly. Am I obliged?
No. Because: Get over yourself.

"Obliged"? Where did I ever suggest you were "obliged", sunshine?
But you are JUDGED on what you do.

You're not qualified.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Alan

2024-03-12 23:07:07 UTC

Post by Alan Browne
Apple Si "upped the ante" - but the hype from Apple hasn't stood testing.

Testing you won't actually show...

Yes or no: Do you have an Apple Si Mac?

Yes or no: could you post screenshots of what you claim you have seen?

I guess you don't.
I could post the screen shots. Certainly. Am I obliged?
No. Because: Get over yourself.

"Obliged"? Where did I ever suggest you were "obliged", sunshine?
But you are JUDGED on what you do.

You're not qualified.

I thought you were "done".

:-)

Jörg Lorenz

2024-03-06 09:07:57 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

Post the screenshots.

Go buy an Apple Silicon Mac and find out for yourself.

A lot of claims and no proof: You are a Troll.

Post by Alan Browne
Or look up the numerous articles online that discuss the same thing.

Idiot.

--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)

Alan Browne

2024-03-06 22:20:02 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

Post the screenshots.

Go buy an Apple Silicon Mac and find out for yourself.

A lot of claims and no proof: You are a Troll.

Just the numbers I see. Do you have an Apple Silicon Mac?

Post by Alan Browne
Or look up the numerous articles online that discuss the same thing.

Idiot.

Stop looking in the mirror - it's bad for your ego.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Alan

2024-03-06 22:24:31 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line.
:-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

Post the screenshots.

Go buy an Apple Silicon Mac and find out for yourself.

A lot of claims and no proof: You are a Troll.

Just the numbers I see. Do you have an Apple Silicon Mac?

The numbers you CLAIM to have seen.

Alan Browne

2024-03-07 22:18:17 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line.
:-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

Post the screenshots.

Go buy an Apple Silicon Mac and find out for yourself.

A lot of claims and no proof: You are a Troll.

Just the numbers I see. Do you have an Apple Silicon Mac?

The numbers you CLAIM to have seen.

Numbers I'm seeing right now actually on this home Apple Si iMac.

I'm not much into proving anything to you. You're simply not important.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Alan

2024-03-08 01:37:00 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product
line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

Post the screenshots.

Go buy an Apple Silicon Mac and find out for yourself.

A lot of claims and no proof: You are a Troll.

Just the numbers I see. Do you have an Apple Silicon Mac?

The numbers you CLAIM to have seen.

Numbers I'm seeing right now actually on this home Apple Si iMac.

Which you will spend time writing about...

...rather than just post a couple of screenshots.

Post by Alan Browne
I'm not much into proving anything to you. You're simply not important.

You are certainly proving that by this reply.

:-)

Alan Browne

2024-03-08 21:47:03 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product
line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

Post the screenshots.

Go buy an Apple Silicon Mac and find out for yourself.

A lot of claims and no proof: You are a Troll.

Just the numbers I see. Do you have an Apple Silicon Mac?

The numbers you CLAIM to have seen.

Numbers I'm seeing right now actually on this home Apple Si iMac.

Which you will spend time writing about...
...rather than just post a couple of screenshots.

Post by Alan Browne
I'm not much into proving anything to you. You're simply not important.

You are certainly proving that by this reply.

Yes, thanks for confirming you're not important. Unexpected humility
from you.

Now, do you own an Apple Si Mac or not?

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Alan

2024-03-09 00:41:22 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should
just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product
line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

Post the screenshots.

Go buy an Apple Silicon Mac and find out for yourself.

A lot of claims and no proof: You are a Troll.

Just the numbers I see. Do you have an Apple Silicon Mac?

The numbers you CLAIM to have seen.

Numbers I'm seeing right now actually on this home Apple Si iMac.

Which you will spend time writing about...
...rather than just post a couple of screenshots.

Post by Alan Browne
I'm not much into proving anything to you. You're simply not important.

You are certainly proving that by this reply.

Yes, thanks for confirming you're not important. Unexpected humility
from you.

You think THAT is what it confirms...

...you answering again?

LOL

Jörg Lorenz

2024-03-06 09:06:20 UTC

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

QED: You live in you own bubble and you do not understand anymore what
happens around your bubble.

Your Mac-selection does not impress anybody at all. My selection of Macs
is bigger and all run on the same OS-version. Even one of this barbecue
grills with an Intel-processor is part of it.

--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)

Alan

2024-03-06 22:24:50 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

QED: You live in you own bubble and you do not understand anymore what
happens around your bubble.

Not at all. And the observations I make are simply that: observations.
They are just the numbers that show for similar operating conditions (my
typical any-time-of-day app load).

Show the screenshots...

Alan Browne

2024-03-06 22:18:15 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

Your contribution in this thread: Completely inadequate and no
understanding of the Silicon-Architecture at all.

Since I have an M3 iMac and it uses more memory for the same load of
apps compared to my i7 iMac, my understanding of it exceeds yours on
this - as it does on most subjects.

QED: You live in you own bubble and you do not understand anymore what
happens around your bubble.

Not at all. And the observations I make are simply that: observations.
They are just the numbers that show for similar operating conditions (my
typical any-time-of-day app load).

Post by JÃ¶rg Lorenz
Your Mac-selection does not impress anybody at all. My selection of Macs
is bigger and all run on the same OS-version. Even one of this barbecue
grills with an Intel-processor is part of it.

Between home and work I have a lot of Macs.

But, if you Google away, you will find a lot of people showing that the
Apple Silicon Macs do not live up to Apple's hype over not needing as
much memory as an intel Mac.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Tyrone

2024-03-05 17:48:16 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.

The "real story" being that the Air is the low end MacBook. Not everyone
needs a $4000 laptop.

Post by Alan Browne
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

For you perhaps. More than adequate for most people. Again, this is the low
end MacBook.

Post by Alan Browne
16 GB is barely adequate and 24 GB is the most you can get. And
compared to commodity value of memory (even of this level), it's grossly
expensive. Worse for SSD.

Except that Arm Macs don't use commodity anything. The RAM/CPUs/GPUs/NPUs/SSD
are all custom and integrated onto a single chip. So the performance beats
any commodity RAM plugged into slots over here and a commodity SSD plugged
into another slot way over there.

All while using way less power too.

Alan Browne

2024-03-05 20:02:46 UTC

Post by Tyrone

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.

The "real story" being that the Air is the low end MacBook. Not everyone
needs a $4000 laptop.

Post by Alan Browne
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

For you perhaps. More than adequate for most people. Again, this is the low
end MacBook.

Post by Alan Browne
16 GB is barely adequate and 24 GB is the most you can get. And
compared to commodity value of memory (even of this level), it's grossly
expensive. Worse for SSD.

Except that Arm Macs don't use commodity anything. The RAM/CPUs/GPUs/NPUs/SSD
are all custom and integrated onto a single chip. So the performance beats

The RAM is not integrated onto the chip. It is soldered onto the chip
carrier. It is commodity LPDDR5 memory from a memory supplier. In the
case of my M3 iMac, the supplier is Micron[1].

Indeed some people have changed the RAM on their Apple Silicon Macs by
heating up the RAM carriers and putting in larger RAM of the same kind.
(This requires a lot of skill and the proper solder masks to carry off).

The SSDs are completely separate chip carriers soldered to the motherboard.

RAM performance is better due to it being directly mapped to the various
IO functions, as such many operations need only pass a pointer to a
memory block for output or input rather than shuffle blocks of data
between device and system memory (or v-v). This accounts for a large
amount of performance gain.

However, when I work I always have the same basic list of apps loaded at
all times. With the i7 iMac it uses less memory than the M3 iMac at any
given time (on the order of 2 GB more).

[1] From System Information | Memory:
Memory: 24 GB
Type: LPDDR5
Manufacturer: Micron

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Alan

2024-03-05 21:51:45 UTC

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.

The "real story" being that the Air is the low end MacBook. Not everyone
needs a $4000 laptop.

Post by Alan Browne
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

For you perhaps. More than adequate for most people. Again, this is the low
end MacBook.

Post by Alan Browne
16 GB is barely adequate and 24 GB is the most you can get. And
compared to commodity value of memory (even of this level), it's grossly
expensive. Worse for SSD.

Except that Arm Macs don't use commodity anything. The
RAM/CPUs/GPUs/NPUs/SSD
are all custom and integrated onto a single chip. So the performance
beats

The RAM is not integrated onto the chip. It is soldered onto the chip
carrier. It is commodity LPDDR5 memory from a memory supplier. In the
case of my M3 iMac, the supplier is Micron[1].
Indeed some people have changed the RAM on their Apple Silicon Macs by
heating up the RAM carriers and putting in larger RAM of the same kind.
(This requires a lot of skill and the proper solder masks to carry off).
The SSDs are completely separate chip carriers soldered to the motherboard.
RAM performance is better due to it being directly mapped to the various
IO functions, as such many operations need only pass a pointer to a
memory block for output or input rather than shuffle blocks of data
between device and system memory (or v-v). This accounts for a large
amount of performance gain.
However, when I work I always have the same basic list of apps loaded at
all times. With the i7 iMac it uses less memory than the M3 iMac at any
given time (on the order of 2 GB more).
Memory:    24 GB
Type:    LPDDR5
Manufacturer:    Micron

1. Do they have the same amount of RAM?

2. Do they run the same version of macOS?

Alan Browne

2024-03-05 22:48:57 UTC

On Mar 5, 2024 at 9:12:45 AM EST, "Alan Browne"

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.

The "real story" being that the Air is the low end MacBook. Not everyone
needs a $4000 laptop.

Post by Alan Browne
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

For you perhaps. More than adequate for most people. Again, this is the low
end MacBook.

Post by Alan Browne
16 GB is barely adequate and 24 GB is the most you can get. And
compared to commodity value of memory (even of this level), it's grossly
expensive. Worse for SSD.

Except that Arm Macs don't use commodity anything. The
RAM/CPUs/GPUs/NPUs/SSD
are all custom and integrated onto a single chip. So the performance
beats

The RAM is not integrated onto the chip. It is soldered onto the chip
carrier. It is commodity LPDDR5 memory from a memory supplier. In
the case of my M3 iMac, the supplier is Micron[1].
Indeed some people have changed the RAM on their Apple Silicon Macs by
heating up the RAM carriers and putting in larger RAM of the same
kind. (This requires a lot of skill and the proper solder masks to
carry off).
The SSDs are completely separate chip carriers soldered to the motherboard.
RAM performance is better due to it being directly mapped to the
various IO functions, as such many operations need only pass a pointer
to a memory block for output or input rather than shuffle blocks of
data between device and system memory (or v-v). This accounts for a
large amount of performance gain.
However, when I work I always have the same basic list of apps loaded
at all times. With the i7 iMac it uses less memory than the M3 iMac
at any given time (on the order of 2 GB more).
   Memory:    24 GB
   Type:    LPDDR5
   Manufacturer:    Micron

1. Do they have the same amount of RAM?

Yep. 24GB.

Post by Alan
2. Do they run the same version of macOS?

Nope. The i7 is a few versions back. Can't go further. I see where
you're going with that but it would not account for 1 .. 2 GB of RAM.

That said, the claim with Apple Silicon was that you didn't need near as
much memory. That is BS.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Alan

2024-03-06 00:18:33 UTC

On Mar 5, 2024 at 9:12:45 AM EST, "Alan Browne"

Post by Your Name
New models of a Mac that is rather pointless. It's now even less
differentiated from the MacBook Pro models. Apple should just drop the
"Air" and "Pro" names and have a single "MacBook" product line. :-\
Apple Announces New MacBook Air Models With M3 Chip
<https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/04/apple-announces-m3-macbook-air/>
Apple Quietly Releases New M3 MacBook Air Lineup
<https://www.idropnews.com/news/apple-quietly-releases-new-m3-macbook-air-lineup/209627/>

Look at the options and memory (RAM and storage) for the real story.

The "real story" being that the Air is the low end MacBook. Not everyone
needs a $4000 laptop.

Post by Alan Browne
The low end version of this has 8GB of RAM. Wholly inadequate.
512 GB of SSD. Barely adequate.

For you perhaps. More than adequate for most people. Again, this is the low
end MacBook.

Post by Alan Browne
16 GB is barely adequate and 24 GB is the most you can get. And
compared to commodity value of memory (even of this level), it's grossly
expensive. Worse for SSD.

Except that Arm Macs don't use commodity anything. The
RAM/CPUs/GPUs/NPUs/SSD
are all custom and integrated onto a single chip. So the
performance beats

The RAM is not integrated onto the chip. It is soldered onto the
chip carrier. It is commodity LPDDR5 memory from a memory supplier.
In the case of my M3 iMac, the supplier is Micron[1].
Indeed some people have changed the RAM on their Apple Silicon Macs
by heating up the RAM carriers and putting in larger RAM of the same
kind. (This requires a lot of skill and the proper solder masks to
carry off).
The SSDs are completely separate chip carriers soldered to the motherboard.
RAM performance is better due to it being directly mapped to the
various IO functions, as such many operations need only pass a
pointer to a memory block for output or input rather than shuffle
blocks of data between device and system memory (or v-v). This
accounts for a large amount of performance gain.
However, when I work I always have the same basic list of apps loaded
at all times. With the i7 iMac it uses less memory than the M3 iMac
at any given time (on the order of 2 GB more).
   Memory:    24 GB
   Type:    LPDDR5
   Manufacturer:    Micron

1. Do they have the same amount of RAM?

Yep. 24GB.

Post by Alan
2. Do they run the same version of macOS?

Nope. The i7 is a few versions back. Can't go further. I see where
you're going with that but it would not account for 1 .. 2 GB of RAM.

It very well could.

That said, the claim with Apple Silicon was that you didn't need near as
much memory. That is BS.

So post the screenshots.

Bud Frede

2024-03-09 13:18:36 UTC

Post by Alan Browne
However, when I work I always have the same basic list of apps loaded
at all times. With the i7 iMac it uses less memory than the M3 iMac
at any given time (on the order of 2 GB more).
Memory: 24 GB
Type: LPDDR5
Manufacturer: Micron

I haven't actually compared this on Apple Silicon vs. Intel. However, it
had been my impression when comparing Linux on the Raspberry Pi vs on
x64 that software actually used less RAM on ARM. I even thought about it
as "a 4GB RPi is roughly equivalent to a PC with 8GB RAM."

I never really did any rigorous measurements though, since it didn't
really seem to be important.

Still, it's interesting to know that an M3 iMac at least is less
efficient with memory than an i7 one.

Bud Frede

2024-03-09 13:09:00 UTC

Post by Tyrone