3 ms·

I buy laptops for end-users and the number one thing they all want, developers included, is for the laptop to be light and thin. To the detriment of everything

I buy laptops for end-users and the number one thing they all want, developers included, is for the laptop to be light and thin. To the detriment of everything else. They'll complain that they're slow, hot, the battery doesn't last, etc. but when I suggest a thicker laptop instead, they'll turn it down.

dangus 3y ago
Once you know that it’s technically possible to have your cake and eat it too (the Apple M1/M2/M3 chip), this becomes a reasonable demand. The MacBook Air released in 2020 with no fan was managing to match and beat the 2019 Intel 16” MacBook Pro in some benchmarks, and that 16” model was itself thicker than the previous model. A lot of people giving up upgradability to join Apple (this isn’t hyperbole: their marketshare notably increased after the M1 debut) getting double the battery life of their last Intel system are making a very logical and reasonable trade-off. When it comes to traveling and getting work done, whether or not I can upgrade the system might take a back seat to whether or not the system hurts my back. The whole point of a laptop is to make a reasonable trade-off for mobility. Of course, that said, it’s true that Apple could provide us with at least a storage upgrade path without any compromise. Memory is debatable since LPDDR has real efficiency benefits. But someone who wants what you can get out of an M3 Max laptop can’t buy that package anywhere else at any price. What x86 system comes in a 14” portable notebook package with ~20 hours of productivity battery life and on-board graphics only 7% slower than a laptop RTX 4080 that can be configured to address over 100GB of VRAM? Thankfully for consumer choice, Intel’s Core Ultra products finally caught up to the type of performance per watt standard that Apple set.
- saltcured 3y ago
  Just to give you another data point, an AMD-based Thinkpad P14s Gen 4 gets about halfway to some of your targets. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U has a pretty nice iGPU. It can be ordered with 64 GB LPDDR5 RAM for ~$1400 USD. Mine, with 32 GB RAM, idles around 4 watts in Linux with Firefox open on WiFi and screen at about 1/3 brightness, which translates to around 13 hrs of battery life.
- chx 3y ago
  > are making a very logical and reasonable trade-off. no they are giving in to hype and it's insanity to pay real world money for a laptop where you can't remove storage. Whether it's for repairs or for upgrade this is a fundamental feature that really can't be negotiated with. There are no ifs, buts, nothing. Reason doesn't enter the picture of buying a computer without removable storage. A lot other things do but reason does not. And, to add, unlike with LPDDR memory, there's no engineering reason to do this. There's a lot other reasons -- most of them are not pretty -- but engineering wise your wins are practically none.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - dangus 3y ago
    Fundamental feature – for you. But not for 23% of US computer buyers who choose Apple systems. This topic reminds me of a story from some relatives. Both relatives are relatively affluent and live in a state with recycling deposits. You save your cans and bottles and return them to the grocery store to get your deposit back, a handful of cents per can. Relative #1 has done this out of habit and thrift for decades, despite being affluent as I discussed. When they were over relative #2’s house for a party, they asked where they keep their cans. #2 said “just throw them in the recycle bin.” #1 said, “but what about the deposit?” And the response was basically just laughter. In the perspective of relative #2, who in their in their right mind cares enough about a bottle deposit to bother wasting their time on it when they can just throw them in the regular recycle bin? It’ll still get recycled, and you save a significant amount of time putting the cans in the deposit machine at the cost of literal pennies per soda can. This is where reason enters the picture. #2 is correct so long as their high income and busy schedule supports the idea that returning can deposits is a complete waste of time. Imagine a doctor canceling an appointment to take their cans over to the grocery store. Now imagine you’re a typical Apple user. You make well above median household income. Apple has 23% marketshare, and coincidentally if you’re top 23% of income in the US you make just about exactly $100,000 a year. Your choice is to buy an Apple system where 1TB of storage costs you an extra $400, but if you bought a PC you could upgrade that storage yourself and only spend around $100, maybe even less. What life sacrifice did you make to spend this extra money if you’re in this income bracket? The truth is you probably wouldn’t notice that missing $400 you spent upgrading the storage to 1TB. Heck, if you’re a business rather than an individual, you now have to pay salaries and factor in lost productivity any time you’re taking a computer away from your employee and spending time repairing it. That situation is double jeopardy: pay IT to do the repair, pay your employee to sit there and do nothing in the meantime. Let’s say you buy a computer every 3 years, which itself is pretty luxurious. In this scenario, that non-upgradable storage basically costs you $100 every year without even considering the sale of your used laptop 3 years later. Basically, getting a laptop with non-removable storage every 3 years like clockwork costs less than a typical streaming service or Amazon Prime. I see no financial reason why any of Apple’s affluent customers should give a flying fuck about upgradable storage. I think it’s actually closer to the bottom of the list than you realize. On top of this, if you’re comparing a Mac to a Windows PC, that means you’re comparing things like integration to your phone and other accessories, battery life, fit and finish, software, performance, and customer support/warranty, not just the single feature of storage upgradability.

dangus 3y ago

Once you know that it’s technically possible to have your cake and eat it too (the Apple M1/M2/M3 chip), this becomes a reasonable demand. The MacBook Air released in 2020 with no fan was managing to match and beat the 2019 Intel 16” MacBook Pro in some benchmarks, and that 16” model was itself thicker than the previous model. A lot of people giving up upgradability to join Apple (this isn’t hyperbole: their marketshare notably increased after the M1 debut) getting double the battery life of their last Intel system are making a very logical and reasonable trade-off. When it comes to traveling and getting work done, whether or not I can upgrade the system might take a back seat to whether or not the system hurts my back. The whole point of a laptop is to make a reasonable trade-off for mobility. Of course, that said, it’s true that Apple could provide us with at least a storage upgrade path without any compromise. Memory is debatable since LPDDR has real efficiency benefits. But someone who wants what you can get out of an M3 Max laptop can’t buy that package anywhere else at any price. What x86 system comes in a 14” portable notebook package with ~20 hours of productivity battery life and on-board graphics only 7% slower than a laptop RTX 4080 that can be configured to address over 100GB of VRAM? Thankfully for consumer choice, Intel’s Core Ultra products finally caught up to the type of performance per watt standard that Apple set.

saltcured 3y ago
Just to give you another data point, an AMD-based Thinkpad P14s Gen 4 gets about halfway to some of your targets. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U has a pretty nice iGPU. It can be ordered with 64 GB LPDDR5 RAM for ~$1400 USD. Mine, with 32 GB RAM, idles around 4 watts in Linux with Firefox open on WiFi and screen at about 1/3 brightness, which translates to around 13 hrs of battery life.
chx 3y ago
> are making a very logical and reasonable trade-off. no they are giving in to hype and it's insanity to pay real world money for a laptop where you can't remove storage. Whether it's for repairs or for upgrade this is a fundamental feature that really can't be negotiated with. There are no ifs, buts, nothing. Reason doesn't enter the picture of buying a computer without removable storage. A lot other things do but reason does not. And, to add, unlike with LPDDR memory, there's no engineering reason to do this. There's a lot other reasons -- most of them are not pretty -- but engineering wise your wins are practically none.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- dangus 3y ago
  Fundamental feature – for you. But not for 23% of US computer buyers who choose Apple systems. This topic reminds me of a story from some relatives. Both relatives are relatively affluent and live in a state with recycling deposits. You save your cans and bottles and return them to the grocery store to get your deposit back, a handful of cents per can. Relative #1 has done this out of habit and thrift for decades, despite being affluent as I discussed. When they were over relative #2’s house for a party, they asked where they keep their cans. #2 said “just throw them in the recycle bin.” #1 said, “but what about the deposit?” And the response was basically just laughter. In the perspective of relative #2, who in their in their right mind cares enough about a bottle deposit to bother wasting their time on it when they can just throw them in the regular recycle bin? It’ll still get recycled, and you save a significant amount of time putting the cans in the deposit machine at the cost of literal pennies per soda can. This is where reason enters the picture. #2 is correct so long as their high income and busy schedule supports the idea that returning can deposits is a complete waste of time. Imagine a doctor canceling an appointment to take their cans over to the grocery store. Now imagine you’re a typical Apple user. You make well above median household income. Apple has 23% marketshare, and coincidentally if you’re top 23% of income in the US you make just about exactly $100,000 a year. Your choice is to buy an Apple system where 1TB of storage costs you an extra $400, but if you bought a PC you could upgrade that storage yourself and only spend around $100, maybe even less. What life sacrifice did you make to spend this extra money if you’re in this income bracket? The truth is you probably wouldn’t notice that missing $400 you spent upgrading the storage to 1TB. Heck, if you’re a business rather than an individual, you now have to pay salaries and factor in lost productivity any time you’re taking a computer away from your employee and spending time repairing it. That situation is double jeopardy: pay IT to do the repair, pay your employee to sit there and do nothing in the meantime. Let’s say you buy a computer every 3 years, which itself is pretty luxurious. In this scenario, that non-upgradable storage basically costs you $100 every year without even considering the sale of your used laptop 3 years later. Basically, getting a laptop with non-removable storage every 3 years like clockwork costs less than a typical streaming service or Amazon Prime. I see no financial reason why any of Apple’s affluent customers should give a flying fuck about upgradable storage. I think it’s actually closer to the bottom of the list than you realize. On top of this, if you’re comparing a Mac to a Windows PC, that means you’re comparing things like integration to your phone and other accessories, battery life, fit and finish, software, performance, and customer support/warranty, not just the single feature of storage upgradability.