It's fun to be back in the age where every few years you want to upgrade your computer because the new ones are so much faster, not because the old one is worn out.<p>20% faster isn't enough to make me regret my M1 purchase, but after one or two more 20% speed gains I'll feel like upgrading to the latest is going to be worth it.
Forgive me my specific view: The M2 itself is marvelous. But the highly integraded path apple chose with all its hardware ruins it for me.
For me, its enviromentally insane to buy such a device that is nearly unrepairable.<p>In context, my Macbook air just died yesterday ... the one from 2014. Luckily, its the replaceble SSD that went dead. And due to OpenCore, it still runs the latest MacOS.<p>If I would by the new M2 with the new MacBook Air: Same problem would doom the complete hardware. And I would have been stuck with the OS that Apple deems I can have.<p>Maybe this comes with age, but I see buzzwords + glitz + speedups ... but little to none envirmental progress. Which is a shame.
A nice bump in specs, but nothing groundbreaking like the initial ship. Somewhat disappointed that AV1 isn't supported in hardware, and Apple's continued push with HEVC gives me doubts they'll support the codec in the future.
I'm curious about what caused the 24GB limit. Does it have 3 memory buses limited to 8GB each?<p>Also a bit disappointed the Mini didn't get a refresh or, at least, the option.
This is all great and everything but when will enterprise customers like me see it? I’ve still my M1 Max on back order since February because “Apple is experiencing supply issues and prioritises consumer and education ahead of enterprise”<p>The M2 Max will be with us when my Mac finally ships…
I hope we see a refresh with the M2 based SoCs in other systems as well this year. I intend to upgrade my old MBP and also probably acquire a Mac Mini or Mac Studio as a workstation later this year, and while the M1 Max/Ultra is pretty great, I'd love to see these incremental improvements up front.
Regarding the Process–architecture–optimization model from intel, what do each of those upgrades mean to the user?<p>I believe Process has the most to deal with energy efficiency due to the shrinkage, which is why M1 was so energy efficient when it was launched.<p>M2 seems like an architecture/optimization change, seems like they are just able to cram more stuff which is why it's faster without increasing battery life.<p>For those familiar with Intel, what does the consumer mainly gain out of optimization product launches?
Funny, I guess B&H were right: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31637122" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31637122</a>
Heres a new black box. It looks like the last but is 20% better. Trust me. We didnt fix bugs in our crappy software. It was perfect the day you got it. So, the improvents could only be in this new black box. Sure we neeed to whip people to mine thse rocks and underpay them, but look at the shiny form over function.<p>Also, just dump your old stuff every year, sine you dont want to be that uncool kid, doyou? All the coal melting, molding, glass, labor, CO2, is worthless now. And while youre here, it will be one kidney or a yearlong service for a low price of $50, which if you give us all your financial history you can get a 3% cashback on.
great. on top of yearly environment destruction via phones. now there are whole displays, batteries, keyboards and a ton of other special material just to fuel this greed carbon monster.