wtallis

It doesn't make a lot of sense to me as a default, but there's an option to turn off the automatic switching of spaces when switching applications, and it pretty much eliminates the unwanted switches from closing the last window on the current space.

It's also not exclusive to Apple; the normal product cadence from Intel and AMD usually has the large workstation and server chips falling behind the consumer chips in peak single-core performance for part of the product cycle. Some market segments just don't sustain annual updates very well, and it's always easier to get a smaller chip out the door first before a larger chip.

There's no happy medium here that would satisfy everybody: when they make marketing claims about improvements relative to products from several years ago, they get criticized for not focusing on the improvements relative to last gen (even if those comparisons are also somewhere in the announcement). When they focus on the most recent generations, people complain that it doesn't make sense to upgrade every year.

Just accept that even if you aren't still using an Intel MacBook Pro, the comparison is still relevant to some part of their target market.

They only just dropped support for Intel Macs from this fall's operating system release (but are still doing security patches for the releases that Intel Macs can run). A year from now, it actually will be fairly reasonable to expect them to give up marketing to the holdouts.

The white plastic iMacs from the PPC and early Intel era were about four times thicker than the current design. Back then they were putting optical drives and 3.5" hard drives and AC power supplies behind the display; now, it's too thin to fit an Ethernet port. The current set of tradeoffs really doesn't make sense to me, but if you accept the thin design as a constraint the continued existence of the chin is pretty obviously necessary; those older iMacs could have much more easily ditched the chin.

DRAM on die isn't a thing at all. eDRAM was a niche technology for a while but hasn't been relevant to PCs for over a decade.

Did the drive give you more sectors when you used a smaller sector size and fewer sectors when you used a larger sector size? If the number of sectors didn't change, it probably didn't actually do a low-level format and instead just toggled whether the drive firmware would skip over the extra bytes as if they didn't exist.

The entire sentence is:

> For a reported security vulnerability affecting any Apple platform to be eligible for an Apple Security Bounty award, you must not disclose it to anyone other than Apple until after Apple has released a software update and published a security advisory for the reported security vulnerability.

Which does not have the meaning of prohibiting disclosure to third parties or the public; it only means that you forfeit the bounty.

The answer is obvious: we would rather have no home automation than have home automation that can't be trusted.

So do you believe that it's acceptable for your comments here to be laced with insults throughout, as long as they aren't intentionally and specifically targeted at the author of the comment you're replying to? Because I definitely don't think it's appropriate behavior to be denigrating an entire Linux distro and anyone whose values align with the purpose of that distro as merely participating in a meme.

Do you honestly expect anyone to believe that you didn't intend "memeOS" to be an insult?

The article says all colors and storage configs were showing ship dates of January 25 or later, so >3 months.

Native doesn't mean "not a web view", it means native. The eight Qt apps on my Mac are really obvious, with basic fundamentals like toolbars, drop down boxes, and context menus bearing no resemblance whatsoever to any native Mac app from any decade.

10-15 years ago it was possible to reliably clock a Qt on Mac app before it finished launching, simply from the app using the wrong hourglass cursor. (The old cursor that had once been a hallmark of classic Mac OS apps ported through Carbon frameworks, and which disappeared from daily usage when the Finder was finally rewritten atop the NeXTSTEP-derived Cocoa frameworks.)

> "and if they are, not more than the median application."

Comparing against the median means you've already thoroughly missed the point.

There's nothing distributed about GCD; it only works within a single machine.