5 ms·
Two reasons I respectfully disagree with you, the first more compelling than the second: First, Apple has a history of dipping its fingers into several cookie
by totalZero 5y ago
Two reasons I respectfully disagree with you, the first more compelling than the second:
First, Apple has a history of dipping its fingers into several cookie jars simultaneously. They source from different suppliers to introduce supply chain redundancy and establish pricing power. This way, they ensure that a transition from a main supplier company to its competitor is always viable, because they build relationships and allow the competitor to generate enough revenue to stay active in that particular product segment. So even if Apple wants to make its own chips, it has a reason to do so at least in part with Intel as the IDM 2.0 push towards foundry becomes a reality.
Second, there are still some significant drawbacks to Apple's new machines. I want more external monitors, for one.
This is neither here nor there, but personally I think Apple should have spent $500 billion on its own chip fabrication infrastructure rather than doing share buybacks over the past ten years.
- vimy 5y ago> Second, there are still some significant drawbacks to Apple's new machines. I want more external monitors, for one. “ Overall, the new MacBook Pro with the M1 Pro chip supports up to two external displays with up to 6K resolution at 60Hz, while the new MacBook Pro with the M1 Max chip supports up to three external displays with up to 6K resolution and one external display with up to 4K resolution at 60Hz” More than this?
- petersellers 5y agoYeah, the person you replied to really seemed to be grasping at straws there. How many laptops for sale now have this level of support for external monitors?
- sgerenser 5y agoI’m not even sure if most PC laptops can drive a single 6K display at 60Hz.
- vanilla_nut 5y agoCurious that external monitors are capped at 60Hz for all M-series processors (i think? the note about the Max is ambiguous). Especially when the internal monitor is 120hz. Or maybe that’s not actually the limit?
- unphased 5y agoWe'll know for sure next week (or already just not me), but thunderbolt compliance means displayport compliance which means there should be no concerns along these lines. I'd be very pissed if I would be limited to 60 on these new machines.
- AlexCoventry 5y agoWhy does anyone need more than 60Hz? Isn't the difference imperceptible?
- InvaderFizz 5y agoIf you haven't experienced 120hz, don't. It spoils you. You can't see much of a difference, but you sure can feel the difference in how things move and react. Experiencing 120+ Hz spoils you. That said, ask me to tell you which screen is 120hz and which one is 165hz in a blind comparison, coinflip. Versus 60hz, just scroll a web page and you'll know instantly.
- dsafonov 5y agoThey are capped at 60Hz at the resolution stated because the actual limiting value is the available bandwidth, and they are choosing to report the bandwidth in terms of "maximum 60Hz resolution". If the limit is 6K at 60Hz, you'll be able to run 4K at >60Hz. My M1 MacBook Pro runs a 1440p monitor at 165Hz just fine over Thunderbolt 3.
- 58028641 5y agoThe HDMI port can do 4K 60hz. The Thunderbolt ports should be able to do 6K 60hz or 4k 120hz.
- 5y ago