5 ms·

> Why does Apple even bother with these fanciful benchmark graphs to tout superiority over processors and GPUs from the PC sphere? Because most consumers dont

> Why does Apple even bother with these fanciful benchmark graphs to tout superiority over processors and GPUs from the PC sphere? Because most consumers dont search for these articles, so they blindly believe all the fake comparisons that apple makes on their webpage

mdp2021 5y ago
Is it the time in history to publish and broadcast in awareness campaigns clear definitions of the term 'immoral'?
cute_boi 5y ago
In short, Gullible Also, we forget that these new "techs" come every year and its boring to track each of these. Companies are using this as advantage.
- mdp2021 5y ago
  > "In short, Gullible" More like, "inexperienced". Tech aside (contexts where complexities offer controversial space in some comparisons, out of benchmarks that may not measure the actual general goal), many are convinced that the spread of false information is severely limited through social and legal devices: loss of reputation, sanctions (e.g. "false advertisement") etc.
newaccount74 5y ago
Because they have a week where they can control the narrative before the press gets their hands on actual devices. Every news site on the planet wants to write about the new Apple stuff, and since there are no 3rd party benchmarks yet, they have to parrot Apple's claims. A week later, most of the press has already forgotten about Apple's new stuff already, and noone cares about the actual benchmarks. Except us techies, who didn't believe Apple's claims in the first place. To be honest I'm much more disappointed that they shipped yet another crappy webcam in the Studio display after claiming it's the best webcam ever. (The webcams in all the M1 Macs suck ass, despite what Apple and the early press reviews claim)
- zamalek 5y ago
  > Except us techies, who didn't believe Apple's claims in the first place. That's very debatable. Even individuals on HN (which is rare atmosphere) defended Apple's claims. The other side of this is that people have been exclusively using Apple products for so long, that they don't have the experience to compare what Apple is doing with the rest of the industry. Apple only has to outdo themselves.
  - eertami 5y ago
    >That's very debatable. Even individuals on HN (which is rare atmosphere) defended Apple's claims. This isn't an accident, it happens due to Apple's pricing/marketing strategy. If you can convince people to pay a premium for your product (when compared to competitors), people psychologically _need_ that product to be better than the cheaper alternatives, or else they feel ripped off. Best to ignore anecdotes from customers and instead rely only on hard benchmarks/data and make purchasing decisions based on what is most suited to you.
    - stouset 5y ago
      Apple products have been competitively priced against similar-performing hardware for years. The so-called "Apple tax" is a myth.
      - sitzkrieg 5y ago
        uhhh in what alternative reality is this true?
        mwint 5y ago
        The one that started roughly the time M1 started shipping in a laptop with good build quality and decent keyboard.
        stouset 5y ago
radiKal07 5y ago
I don't know. I think most people that are about to spend $4000 will do a little bit of research beforehand.
- rvanlaar 5y ago
  I don't think it's really necessary. $ 4000 is relatively cheap. The review in the verge hits this point. The verge previously bought a $16,599 model from apple, which performs worse than the current $4,000 model. https://www.theverge.com/22981815/apple-mac-studio-m1-ultra-max-review https://www.theverge.com/22981815/apple-mac-studio-m1-ultra-...
mschuster91 5y ago
> so they blindly believe all the fake comparisons that apple makes on their webpage They're not that fake to begin with, at least not in "experienced performance" aka how performant the system feels for the user. Apple's stuff is expensive but in terms of performance even the Intel-based Mac lineup just blows the direct competition away: - Apple's solid-aluminium body provides vastly better thermals than the Windows world which is usually plastic crap, which allows them to run the same Intel processor on boost mode for a longer time, and the fans are at least in my experience a lot better (especially in loudness and "annoyance" factor - even at full power, the fans of a MacBook are way better to listen to than those of your average Windows laptop). For the Mac Pro / iMac lineup, same thing. Most of the Windows world ships with barely adequate coolers and no thinking of airflow, whereas Apple... well, open any tower Mac Pro and see for yourself. That's what a cooler is called... - Apple's OS has way less crap and clutter going on that gobbles performance (there's just at this moment a submission on the front page that details among other things how Windows got transmuted into a horrible mess of advertising and half a dozen competing frameworks), and they have a lot more control over the hardware and driver stack which means that Apple does not depend on the shoddy work that vendors for the Windows world can pass as "quality tested drivers". The result is better battery performance (because as Apple can control the entire stack they can make full use of sleep modes and other energy saving measures) and less bugs. - related, but not by something that Apple has done: There isn't much malware going on on macOS and never has been when compared to the Windows world - you can get by without a virus scanner just fine. In contrast, most of the Windows world ships some crap "free for three months" virus scanner bundled which just destroys performance. - Apple's own chipset designs are, while still based on standards such as the ARM ISA, completely fine-tuned to their needs - which means that, unlike the Windows world which carries about three decades worth of old garbage in their CPUs, Apple can devote more of the same chip area to the needs of modern computing. - Here's a bit of a controversial take: Unlike the Windows world where most vendors ship systems with highly modular components (i.e. CPU, RAM and storage can be taken and upgraded), Apple solders the chips to the mainboards, very near together. That allows not just for higher performance because the latencies are lower but also because the chips can be cooled together and so run at a higher frequency.

mdp2021 5y ago

Is it the time in history to publish and broadcast in awareness campaigns clear definitions of the term 'immoral'?

cute_boi 5y ago

In short, Gullible Also, we forget that these new "techs" come every year and its boring to track each of these. Companies are using this as advantage.

mdp2021 5y ago
> "In short, Gullible" More like, "inexperienced". Tech aside (contexts where complexities offer controversial space in some comparisons, out of benchmarks that may not measure the actual general goal), many are convinced that the spread of false information is severely limited through social and legal devices: loss of reputation, sanctions (e.g. "false advertisement") etc.

newaccount74 5y ago

Because they have a week where they can control the narrative before the press gets their hands on actual devices. Every news site on the planet wants to write about the new Apple stuff, and since there are no 3rd party benchmarks yet, they have to parrot Apple's claims. A week later, most of the press has already forgotten about Apple's new stuff already, and noone cares about the actual benchmarks. Except us techies, who didn't believe Apple's claims in the first place. To be honest I'm much more disappointed that they shipped yet another crappy webcam in the Studio display after claiming it's the best webcam ever. (The webcams in all the M1 Macs suck ass, despite what Apple and the early press reviews claim)

zamalek 5y ago
> Except us techies, who didn't believe Apple's claims in the first place. That's very debatable. Even individuals on HN (which is rare atmosphere) defended Apple's claims. The other side of this is that people have been exclusively using Apple products for so long, that they don't have the experience to compare what Apple is doing with the rest of the industry. Apple only has to outdo themselves.
- eertami 5y ago
  >That's very debatable. Even individuals on HN (which is rare atmosphere) defended Apple's claims. This isn't an accident, it happens due to Apple's pricing/marketing strategy. If you can convince people to pay a premium for your product (when compared to competitors), people psychologically _need_ that product to be better than the cheaper alternatives, or else they feel ripped off. Best to ignore anecdotes from customers and instead rely only on hard benchmarks/data and make purchasing decisions based on what is most suited to you.
  - stouset 5y ago
    Apple products have been competitively priced against similar-performing hardware for years. The so-called "Apple tax" is a myth.
    - sitzkrieg 5y ago
      uhhh in what alternative reality is this true?
      - mwint 5y ago
        The one that started roughly the time M1 started shipping in a laptop with good build quality and decent keyboard.
        stouset 5y ago

radiKal07 5y ago

I don't know. I think most people that are about to spend $4000 will do a little bit of research beforehand.

rvanlaar 5y ago
I don't think it's really necessary. $ 4000 is relatively cheap. The review in the verge hits this point. The verge previously bought a $16,599 model from apple, which performs worse than the current $4,000 model. https://www.theverge.com/22981815/apple-mac-studio-m1-ultra-max-review https://www.theverge.com/22981815/apple-mac-studio-m1-ultra-...

mschuster91 5y ago

> so they blindly believe all the fake comparisons that apple makes on their webpage They're not that fake to begin with, at least not in "experienced performance" aka how performant the system feels for the user. Apple's stuff is expensive but in terms of performance even the Intel-based Mac lineup just blows the direct competition away: - Apple's solid-aluminium body provides vastly better thermals than the Windows world which is usually plastic crap, which allows them to run the same Intel processor on boost mode for a longer time, and the fans are at least in my experience a lot better (especially in loudness and "annoyance" factor - even at full power, the fans of a MacBook are way better to listen to than those of your average Windows laptop). For the Mac Pro / iMac lineup, same thing. Most of the Windows world ships with barely adequate coolers and no thinking of airflow, whereas Apple... well, open any tower Mac Pro and see for yourself. That's what a cooler is called... - Apple's OS has way less crap and clutter going on that gobbles performance (there's just at this moment a submission on the front page that details among other things how Windows got transmuted into a horrible mess of advertising and half a dozen competing frameworks), and they have a lot more control over the hardware and driver stack which means that Apple does not depend on the shoddy work that vendors for the Windows world can pass as "quality tested drivers". The result is better battery performance (because as Apple can control the entire stack they can make full use of sleep modes and other energy saving measures) and less bugs. - related, but not by something that Apple has done: There isn't much malware going on on macOS and never has been when compared to the Windows world - you can get by without a virus scanner just fine. In contrast, most of the Windows world ships some crap "free for three months" virus scanner bundled which just destroys performance. - Apple's own chipset designs are, while still based on standards such as the ARM ISA, completely fine-tuned to their needs - which means that, unlike the Windows world which carries about three decades worth of old garbage in their CPUs, Apple can devote more of the same chip area to the needs of modern computing. - Here's a bit of a controversial take: Unlike the Windows world where most vendors ship systems with highly modular components (i.e. CPU, RAM and storage can be taken and upgraded), Apple solders the chips to the mainboards, very near together. That allows not just for higher performance because the latencies are lower but also because the chips can be cooled together and so run at a higher frequency.