historyloop

It leaves a bad taste in my mouth when an argument in that area starts using fake math to drive a point home. Top-tier engineers spend 6 months to have 20% improvement that could be achieved by spending 20% more on hardware?

Where IS all this coming from? Why is it acceptable to pull out a few random numbers out of our ass and conclude that it's always best to buy more hardware?

I know Google literally invented HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 to shave a few % off their hardware costs. And they had to not only implement this in Chrome and Google.com but to make it a world-wide standard. So surely they must be the idiots putting top-tier engineers for 6 months (or more) on such optimization efforts, instead of spending more on hardware? I don't know.

I wanna see a language where the type system and the actual language are the same language.

I'm not talking about self-hosted compiler, which TS is already. But basically what runs statically and what is compiled for runtime to be the same language in two contexts.

C++ is moving in that direction with constexpr expansion, but it also has to carry the legacy of macros, its existing type system, templates, and so on.

We need something clean.

> This meme about Apple products deriving most of their demand from being status symbols is a decade or two out of date.

Both of you are arguing on which side of an ideal abstraction (Veblen goods) Apple is. Seems silly to me.

Apple products ARE status symbols in many countries, that's what most of the Chinese market is for Apple presently.

They're also playing as utilitarian tech products with mass appeal. Apple has always had this hybrid strategy, it's not one OR the other.

A quick look at their profit margins vs. the competition will show that they're marking up their products significantly above the competition. And I mean in profit margin specifically, so that we don't have this argument about whether they have more expensive software and hardware in principle (they do, but most of it is profit margin).

And also sorry but this is a $15 battery sold for $99, even as an Apple user they're losing me here. Some of their accessories are literally for people who want to spend money on Apple shit.

> Would anyone else just be fine with a thick phone that had a better internal battery?

Replaceable battery.

Anyway, this argument has been made plenty of times. Apple prefers to sell you a new phone and an external battery.

As we know grammatical errors are the ideal way to judge if something is real or fake.

For the money this 3000 mAh Apple bank costs, you can have 4 of these lasting you literally a whole month.

Kinda hilarious.

> The M1 was hailed as an entry level chip

Hailed by whom? I doubt you'll find a single instance of Apple calling M1 an "entry level chip".

It looks like this is the blogosphere getting too high on their own supply, huh?

I don't care much about tracking, but this ad is very effective. It's kinda dishonest about what tracking is (it's not bunch of people making job and purchase decisions for you, come on). But effective.

I wonder if they can't ship the same M1 but with some external RAM and GPU. It won't speed up some apps, but it'll help with Pro apps.

There's a limit to how much we can hypothesize about the nature of other universes, given we don't know if they actually exist. It'd be foolish to claim "QED" either way.

Well this blog post ended precisely how I expected it to end. "Maybe."

It's always a great time to complain.