> Today, Apple is carbon neutral for global corporate operations, and by 2030, plans to have net-zero climate impact across the entire business, which includes manufacturing supply chains and all product life cycles. This also means that every chip Apple creates, from design to manufacturing, will be 100 percent carbon neutral.
But what they won't do is put the chip in an expandable and repairable system so that you don't have to discard and replace it every few years. This renders the carbon-neutrality of the chips meaningless. It's not the chip, it's the packaging that is massively unfriendly to the environment, stupid.
The recycling center shouldn't have resold the devices (which is, as you point out, effectively theft). However, Apple should not be shredding hundreds of thousands of otherwise usable devices.
Apple puts 56 screws in the Unibody MBP keyboards. They were practically the pioneer of gluing components in permanently. They don't care about technicians. Not even their own. They have been one of the leaders of the anti-right-to-repair movement from day one.
Also Apple's glue isn't usually that bad to work with. Doesn't leave much residue, so as long as you know where to apply the heat you can do a clean repair and glue the new component back in.
I’m not a fan of planned obselence and waste but this is clearly wrong. They’ve spent loads of engineering effort designing a machine for their store that can replace and reseal and test iPhone screen replacements out back.
But at the same time, a single chip with everything included will also make these phones pretty sturdy, where it either fails completely, or remain working for long years.
That said, the previous poster's argument is terrible and gluing a phone is not what allows """peak performance"""
Says it all pretty much.
In the very same order.
So, no sir. Apple isn't the environment friendly company that they claim to be. So much money, and so little accountability.
It's not so much fresh vegetables, but ingredients in other types of food -- especially the frozen fruit, vegetables and farmed seafood that finds its way into grocery store and restaurant supply chains.
Do you have any idea how many superfund sites are in Silicon Valley alone?
I was pointing out the mindset of people who don’t care about ground pollution of their products because their products are made elsewhere.
I see you've never been to Houston.
It has also come to a point where none of the extensions makes sense for me. 512GB is plenty. RAM might be an issue - but I honestly don't have enough data on that. The last time I had more than 16GB RAM was in 2008 on my hand built desktop.
As long as the battery can be replaced/fixed - even if it's not user serviceable, I'm okay with that. I'd guess I'm not in the minority here. Most people buy a computer and then take it to the store even if there's a minor issue. And Apple actually shines here. I have gotten my other laptop serviced - but only in unauthorized locations with questionable spare parts. With Apple, every non-tech savvy person I know has been able to take to an Apple store at some point and thereby extend the life.
That's why I believe having easily accessible service locations does more to device longevity than being user-serviceable.
(In comparison, HTC wanted 4 weeks to fix my phone plus 1wk either way in shipping time and me paying shipping costs in addition to the cost of repair. Of course, I abandoned the phone entirely than paying to fix it.)
We could actually test this hypothesis - if we could ask an electronics recycler on the average age of the devices they get by brand, we should get a clear idea on what brands actually last longer.
Also worth noting that some people might be taking laptops to repair shops precisely because they are not user serviceable. Companies like framework are trying to change this with well-labelled internals and easily available parts.
> "AirPods are designed with numerous materials and features to reduce their environmental impact, including the 100 percent recycled rare earth elements used in all magnets. The case also uses 100 percent recycled tin in the solder of the main logic board, and 100 percent recycled aluminum in the hinge. AirPods are also free of potentially harmful substances such as mercury, BFRs, PVC, and beryllium. For energy efficiency, AirPods meet US Department of Energy requirements for battery charger systems. Apple’s Zero Waste program helps suppliers eliminate waste sent to landfills, and all final assembly supplier sites are transitioning to 100 percent renewable energy for Apple production. In the packaging, 100 percent of the virgin wood fiber comes from responsibly managed forests."
Except you and I surely must know that's not true, that their machines have industry leading service lifetimes, and correspondingly high resale values as a result. Yes some pro users replace their machines regularly but those machines generally go on to have long productive lifetimes. Many of these models are also designed to be highly recyclable when the end comes. It's just not as simple as you're making out.
Was resting my 2010 MBP on the railing of a second story balcony during a film shoot and it dropped onto the marble floor below. Got pretty dented, but all that didn't work was the ethernet port. Got the 2015 one and it was my favorite machine ever - until it got stolen.
2017 one (typing on now) is the worst thing I've ever owned and I'm looking forward to getting one of the new ones. 2017 one:
-Fries any low voltage USB device I plug in (according to some internal Facebook forms they returned 2-5k of this batch for that reason)
-When it fried an external drive plugged in on the right, also blew out the right speaker.
-Every time I try and charge it I get to guess which USB-C port is going to work for charging. If I pick wrong I have to power cycle to power brick (this is super fun when the laptops dead and there's no power indicator, as there is on the revived magsafe)
-Half-dime shaped bit of glass popped out of the bottom of the screen when it was under load - this has happened to others in the same spot but user error..
Pissed Apple wouldn't replace it given how many other users have had the same issues, but this thing has taken a beating as have my past laptops. I'll still give them money if the new one proves to be as good as it seems.
Please stop copying marketing content, it really doesn't help your argument.
Additionally, macbooks have high failure rates, especially with keyboards in the previous generations, but also overheating because of their dreadful airflow. Time will tell what happens to the M1, but Apple's hardware is just as (un)reliable as say, Dell's.
No, personal experience isn't data.
Do you have data to support your statement?
> Apple's hardware is just as (un)reliable as say, Dell's.
When I had access to reports from IT on a previous job (5k+ employees, most on MacBooks) Apple was definitely much more reliable than the Dell Windows machines in use. More reliable than the ThinkPads as well but this is data from one company, unsure how it compares to other large orgs.
Not only more reliable but customer service was much faster and better with Apple computers than Dell's.
Seems like a huge waste to throw away a $2000+ machine when it's out of warranty because some $5 part on it dies and Apple not only doesn't provide a spare but actively fights anyone trying to repare them, while the options they realistically will give you out of warranty being having your motherboard replaced for some insane sum like $1299 or having you buy a new laptop.
Or what if you're a klutz and spill your grape juice glass over your keyboard? Congrats, now you're -$2000 lighter since there's no way to take it apart and clean the sticky mess inside.
Thanks to the Right To Repair, you can take the laptop to pretty much any repair shop and they can replace anything you damaged with OEM or third-party parts. They even have schematics, so they can just desolder and resolder failed chips. In the past, this sort of thing would be a logic board swap for $1000 at the very least, but now it's just $30 + labor.
Oh, there is no right to repair. So I guess give Apple $2000 again and don't drink liquids at work.
Which is ironic given that Apple laptops are often depicted next to freshly brewed cafe lattes.
What makes you say that? What did you expect would happen if you spill juice into your laptop?
What they are perhaps fighting is unauthorized repairs, in the sense that they want to be able to void the warranty if some random third party messes with the insides. That's not quite the same thing.
Apple has been very helpful when I brought in a 5 year old macbook pro with keyboard issues, replaced some keys for free on the spot. Also when the batteries of 8 and 9 year old MBAs started to go bad, they said they could replace them but advised me to order batteries from iFixit and do it myself, which I did.
There are other options besides throwing it away.
You can (a) trade it in for a new Mac (I just received $430 for my 2014 MBP) or (b) sell it for parts on eBay.
You can unscrew a Mac and clean it out. You can also take it into Apple for repair.
"Yeah <normal guy>'s out sick today, I'm his replacement."
In all seriousness I would absolutely love to do this sort of thing IRL, in situations where I'll just make incompetent management etc unimpressed (because I'm showing their inefficiency) and there wouldn't be any real/significant ramifications (eg machines that processed material a couple notches more interesting than what PCI-DSS covers).
But obviously I don't mean I'd literally use the above example to achieve this ;P
I've just learned a bit about (eh, you could say "been bitten by") poorly coordinated e-waste management/refurbishment/etc programs - these can be a horrendously inefficient money-grab if the top-level coordination isn't driven by empathy in the right places. So I would definitely get a kick out of doing something like that properly.
It takes a few minutes to do that on a laptop but it's not that long.
Turns out someone got confused between left and right, gave him the wrong instructions, and he smashed 200 brand new SSDs. Ouch.
Even software updates often stretch as far back as 5 year old models, so they’re pretty good with this.
iOS 15 is supported by the 6s, which was 2015. So 6 years.
And I still know people using devices from these eras. Apple may not be repair friendly, but at the end of the day, their devices are the least likely to end up in the trash.
If you look at android phones, you're looking at a few years only.
Because of software
Of all the garbage my family produces over the course of time, my Apple products probably take less than 0.1% of my family's share of the landfill. Do you find this to be different for you? Or am I speaking past the point you're trying to make here?
Waste creates more emissions. Instead of producing something once, you produce it twice. That's why waste is bad, it's not just about disposing of the wasted product.
That being said, I haven’t read any third-party audits to know if this is more than Apple marketing. Would be curious if they live up to their own marketing.
Do people really think that companies like Apple et al (who have a huge number of people following them eager to rip into them at ever opportunity) could get away with a "marketing story" like that? Like, really, Apple just making all that up and _not one single person_ whistleblowing on it if it were a lie?
Strange that they would ask these questions if they were simply going to shred the device.
Why not? It does sound micer that way and some customers may actually think they resell them just because of this...
You have a point but if they were actually truly neutral it wouldn't matter if you make 100,000 of them and throw them away.
Because that degrades the performance overall. SoC has proven itself to simply be more performant than a fully hotswappable architecture. Look at the GPU improvements they're mentioning - PCIe 5.0 (yet unreleased) maxes out at 128GB/s, whereas the SoC Apple has announced today is transferring between the CPU/GPU at 400GB/s.
In the end, performance will always trump interchangability for mobile devices.
but it would be nice if the soc itself would be a module that you could upgrade and keep the case/display, it would also cut down on environmental impact probably as well...
So there is another, quite lucrative, option besides discarding it.
This doesn't mean Apple's carbon footprint has to suffer. If Apple does a better job recycling old Macbooks than your average repair guy who takes an old CPU and puts in a new one in a repairable laptop then Apple's carbon footprint could be reduced. I remember the days when I would replace every component in my desktop once a year, I barely thought about recycling the old chips or even selling them to someone else. They were simply too low value to an average person to bother with recycling them properly or reselling them.
How would a 5 nanometer chip be "repairable"? Who would be able to repair such a chip and what would the tool cost be?
Mac computers last way longer than their PC counterparts.
Who are you calling stupid? If you're going to call someone or something stupid, don't do it in a stupid way.
Always follow the money :-)
I never could see any fundamental reason why "integrated" should mean "underpowered." Apple is turning things around, and is touting the benefits of high-performance integrated graphics.
Do you have a source for this?
So the M1 Max is not as fast as a high end desktop GPU. Still, it is incredible that you are getting a GPU that performs slightly less than a last generation 2080 desktop GPU at just 50-60 watts.
Not really wrong. Memory bandwidth is only a limitation for a very narrow subset of problems.
I've gone back and forth between server-grade AMD hardware with 4-channel and 8-channel DDR4 and consumer-grade hardware with 2-channel DDR4. For most of my work (compiling, mostly) the extra memory bandwidth didn't make any difference. The consumer parts are actually faster for compilation because they have a higher turbo speed, despite having only a fraction of the memory bandwidth.
Memory bandwidth does limit certain classes of problems, but we mostly run those on GPUs anyway. Remember, the M1 Max memory bandwidth isn't just for the CPU. It's combined bandwidth for the GPU and CPU.
It will be interesting to see how much of that memory can be allocated to a M1 Max. It might be the most accessible way to get a lot of high-bandwidth RAM attached to a GPU for a while.
Your compute anecdotes have no bearing on (i)GPU bottlenecks.
Sure. It'd be tough to be the top performing chip in the market, but you can get pretty close.
There was always one reason: limited memory bandwidth. You simply couldn't cram enough pins and traces for all the processor io plus a memory bus wide enough to feed a powerful GPU. (at least not in a reasonable price)
Edit: Found answer here. GPU core is not the same thing as a CUDA core. https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/73i3ne/why_do_app...
NVIDIA defines any SIMD lane to be a core. They recently have gotten more creative with definition, they were able to double FP32 executions per unit (versus previous gen) and hence in marketing materials, doubled the number of "CUDA cores".
But no, I don't think they did.
My impression was that it was still the hardware holding things back: Everything but the latest desktop CPUs still using the older Vega architecture. And even those latest desktop CPUs are essentially PS5 chips that got binned out.
In the wider picture, gpu compute in general on PC also failed to become mainstream enough to sway consumer choices. Development experience for GPUs is still crap vs the cpu, the languages are mostly bad, there's massive sw platform fragmentation among os vendors and gpu vendors, driver bugs causing OS crashes left and right, etc.
Re your impression, yes, AMD shifted focus more toward cpu from gpu in their SoCs after a while when their initiatives failed to take off outside consoles. But it's been an ok place to be, just keeping the gpu somewhat ahead of Intel competition and getting some good successes in the cpu side.
Laptop/desktop have 2 channels.
High-end desktop can have 4 channels.
Servers have 8 channels.
How does Apple do that?
I was always assuming that having that many channels is prohibitive in terms of either power consumption and/or chip size.
But I guess I was wrong.
It can't be GDDR because chips with the required density don't exist, right?
It's much easier to make a wider bus with LPDDR5 and chips soldered on the board than with DIMMs.
Might even forebode soldering RAM onto packages from here on out and forever.
Steamdeck will probably have a crazy 100gb/sec ram b/w. twice of current laptops and desktops.
Not the usual DDR5 used in Desktop / Laptop.
DDR4 is the common desktop/laptop chip. LPDDR5 is cell-phone chip, so its kinda funny to see a low-power RAM being used in a very wide fashion like this.
They are also innovating with things like on-chip ECC for LPDDR4+, while desktop DDR4 still doesn't have ECC thanks to Intel intentionally gimping it for market segmentation.
LPDDR5 is a completely different protocol from DDR5 by the way, just like GDDR5 is completely different from DDR3 it was based on. LPDDR3 was maybe the last time the low-power series was something like DDR3 (the mainline).
Today, LPDDR5 is based on LPDDR4, which diverged significantly from DDR4.
> They are also innovating with things like on-chip ECC for LPDDR4+
DDR5 will have on-chip ECC standard, even unbuffered / unregistered.
Basically the bus is really large, and the memory dies must be really close to the main processing die. Those memory were notably on the RX Vega from AMD, and before that on the R9 Fury.
I would love to see how they fare against 2021 Intel and amd chips.
They are giving Mac laptop users information to try to persuade them to upgrade from their 2017 MacBook Pros and this is probably the most relevant comparison.
This is their first ISA that actually reacts to Zen, from what I've heard.
I am sure we will see reviews against high end intel and amd laptops very soon, and I wont be surprised if real world performance blows people away, as the M1 Air did.
Those will be called M2 and come later next year, according to the rumor mill anyway.
1- want to convince people still on Intel Macs to update
2- lengthen the news cycle when the first units are shipped to the tech press and _they_ run these benchmarks
A high end graphics card from nvidia these days has 1000GB/s all to itself, not in competition with the CPUs. If these GPUs are really as high of performance as claimed, there may be situations where one subsystem or the other is starved.
I'll be very curious to see those comparisons picked apart when people get their hands on these, and I think it's time for me to give Macbooks another chance after switching exclusively to linux for the past couple years.
If Apple is buying Intel CPUs, there's no reason making direct performance comparisons to competitors. They're all building out of the same parts bin. They would want to talk about the form factor and the display - areas where they could often out-do competitors. Now there's actually something to talk about with the CPU/GPU/hardware-performance.
I think Apple is also making the comparison to push something else: performance + lifestyle. For me, the implication is that I can buy an Intel laptop that's nicely portable, but a lot slower; I could also buy an Intel laptop that's just as fast, but requires two power adapters to satisfy its massive power drain and really doesn't work as a laptop at all. Or I can buy a MacBook Pro which has the power of the heavy, non-portable Intel laptops while sipping less power than the nicely portable ones. I don't have to make a trade-off between performance and portability.
I think people picked apart the comparisons on the M1 and were pretty satisfied. 6-8 M1 performance cores will offer a nice performance boost over 4 M1 performance cores and we basically know how those cores benchmark already.
I'd also note that there are efforts to get Linux on Apple Silicon.
This kind of fell by the wayside after switching to Intel, for obvious reasons: the chips weren’t differentiators anymore.
Previously I got 2017 Macbook Air SSD upgraded using an SSD and an adapter that I ordered from Amazon.
What’s that narrative that Apple devices are not upgradable or repairable?
It simply not true. If anything, Apple devices are the easiest to get serviced since there are not many models and pretty much all repair shops can deal with all devices that are still usable. Because of this, even broken Apple devices are sold and bought all the time.
Nice, except doing a screen replacement on a modern iPhone like the 13 series will disable your FaceID making your iPhone pretty much worthless.
>Previously I got 2017 Macbook Air SSD upgraded using an SSD and an adapter that I ordered from Amazon
Nice, but on the modern Macbooks, the SSD is soldered and not replaceable. There is no way to upgrade them or replace them if they break, so you just have to throw away the whole laptop.
So yea, parent was right, Apple devices are the worst for reparability period since the ones you're talking about are not manufactured anymore therefore don't represent the current state of affairs and the ones that are manufactured today are built to not be repaired.
Screen replacement is 50$, glass replacement is 30$.
iPhone 13 is very new, give it a few years and the hardware people will leverage the desire of not spending 1000$ on a new phone when the current one works fine except for that broken part.
if there’s a demand there would be a response.
I'm talking about 2020 devices where you can't just "change the chips" and hope it works like in the 2015 model from the video you posted.
Modern Apple devices aren't repairable anymore.
Anyway, people are crafty and engineering is not an Apple-exclusive trade. believe it or not, Apple can’t do anything about the laws of physics.
That’s known as private-public key crypto with keys burnt into efuses on-die on the SoC.
You can’t get around that (except for that one dude in Shenzhen who just drills into the SoC and solders wires by hand which happen to hit the right spots). But generally, no regular third party repair shop will find a way around this.
You know, these encryption authentications work between ICs and not between lenses and motors. Keep the coded IC, change the coil. Things also have different breaking modes, for example a screen might break down due to the glass failure(which cannot be coded) and the repair shop can replace the broken assembly part when keeping the IC that ensures the communication with the mainboard. Too complicated for a street shop? Someone will build a service that does it B2B, shops will ship it ti them, they will ship it back leaving only the installation to the street shop.
Possibilities are endless. Some easier some harder but we are talking about talent that makes all kind of replicas of all kind of devices. With billions of iPhones out there, it's actually very lucrative market to be able to salvage 1000USD device, their margins could be even better than the margins of Apple when they charge 100USD to change the glass of the LCD assembly.
Watch Luis Rosmann on youtube.
Instead of watching videos and getting angry about Apple devices being impossible to repair, I get my Apple devices repaired when something breaks. Significantly more productive approach, you should try it.
Your old Apple devices, that are known to be vert easy to repair. You wouldn't be so confident with the latest gear.
But why spoil it for you? Let's talk in a few year when you find it out the hard way on your own skin.
Here is a video from 2013, him complaining that Apple doesn't let people repair their products: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdlZ1HgFvxI
He recently moved to a new larger shop in attempt to grew his Apple repair operations. Then had to move back to a smaller shop because as it turns out, it wasn't Apple who is ruining his repair business.
You will need to make a choice sometimes. Often you can't have small efficient and repairable all the time.
Only if you go to someone who isn't an authorised Apple repairer.
I mean, you can replace the logic board. Wasteful, sure, but there's no need to throw out the whole thing.
There's also the fact that Apple does things like integrate the display connector into the panel part. So, if it fails - like when Apple made it too short with the 2016 and 2017 Macbook Pros causing the flexgate controversy - it requires replacing a $600 part instead of a $6 one.
As far as I understand, the less components and heat, the longer the electronics keep working.
>According to iFixit, the Surface Laptop isn’t repairable at all. In fact, it got a 0 out of 10 for repairability and was labeled a “glue-filled monstrosity.”
The lowest scores previously were a 1 out of 10 for all previous iterations of the Surface Pro
Basically, they can only change a few components (keyboard, display (with assembly), motherboard, and probably the aluminium case), but that's it.
It's made to be thrown away, instead of repaired.
The phones in my family are an iPhone 6S, iPhone 8 and an iPhone XS. All running the latest iOS. The 6S got a battery swap for 50€, others still going strong.
Similar with tablets, we have three and the latest one is a 2017 iPad Pro. All running the latest iPadOS.
Stuff doesn't need to be repairable and upgradable if it can outlast the competition by a factor of two while still staying on the latest official OS update.
Can't do that with any Android device. A 6 year old PC laptop might still be relevant though.
Also, implying that repairability is required for environmental sustainability is questionable at best. People in their vast majority tend to get rid of 5 years old phones and laptops.
I really enjoy linux as a development environment, but this is going to be VERY difficult to compete with..
I'm kidding, that stuff has no affect on anything.
Justifiable, as in "does this make practical sense", is not the word, because it doesn't. Justifiable, as in, "does it fit within my budget?" yes that's accurate. I don't have a short answer to why my personal budget is that flexible, but I do remember there was a point in my life where I would ask the same thing as you about other people. The reality is that you either have it or you don't. That being said, nothing I had been doing for money is really going to max this kind of machine out or improve my craft. But things that used to be computationally expensive won't be anymore. Large catalogues of 24 megapixel RAWs used to be computationally expensive. Now I won't even notice, even with larger files and larger videos, and can expand what I do there along with video processing, which is all just entertainment. But I can also do that while running a bunch of docker containers and VMs... within VMs, and not think about it.
This machine, for me, is the catalyst for greater consumptive spending though. I've held off on new cameras, new NASs, new local area networking, because my current laptop and devices would chug under larger files.
Hope there was something to glean from that context. But all I can really offer is "make, or simply have, more money", not really profound.
Like there’s the potential tax deductibility, along with being a store of value (it will probably be $2300 in a few years but thats okay), making it easier to rationalize future laptops in the future by trading this one in. But I’m not betting on any of that.
I’ve just been waiting for this specific feature set, I’m upgrading from a maxed out dual GPU 2015 MBP that I purchased in 2017.
I skipped the whole divergence and folly.
No butterfly keyboards, no tolerating usbc while the rest of the world caught up, no usbc charging, no touch bar, I held out. And now I get Apple Silicon which already had rave reviews and blew everything else out of the water in the laptop space, and now I get the version with the RAM I want.
Surprisingly little fanfare, on my end. Which is kind of funny because I remember fondly configuring expensive maxed out Apple computers on their website that I could never afford. Its definitely more monumental if you save money for one specific thing and achieve that. But now I just knew I was already going to do it if Apple released a specific kind of M1 upgrade in a specific chassis, which they did and more. So it fit within my available credit, and which I’ll pay off likely by the end of the week, and I’m also satisfied that I get the points and a spending promotion my credit card had told me about.
But I was going to buy this irregardless.
My time is worth so much more to me than money.
It's because I need to use my computer whilst not physically attached to the same spot i.e. between work/home, travel.
You know the same reason as almost everyone else.
What does saparate machine for work has to do with "compilation speeds" in the first place?
To be clear, I'm not getting one of these, but there's clearly people that will drop extra thousands into a "performance machine" just because they like performance machines and they can do it. It doesn't really need to be justified.
Truthfully, I'm struggling to imagine the scenario where a "performance laptop" is justifiable to produce, in the sense you mean it. Surely, in most cases, a clunky desktop is sufficient and reasonably shipped when traveling, and can provide the required performance in 99% of actual high-performance-needed scenarios.
If I had money to burn, though, I'd definitely be buying a luxury performance laptop before I'd be buying an update to my jalopy. I use my car as little as I possibly can. I use my computer almost all the time.
When commenting on Mac hardware it is always difficult for me to separate wishful thinking, cultism and actual facts.
My personal desktop was about $4k for what's inside the case. Add in my $2k monitor, and I'm right up there.
Some people call it excessive, I do too. But man, my desktop is blazing fast and my gaming experience is top notch.
The $1000 5950x was the easiest decision. Cut my compile times by 80%.
If I was serious about a portable development and such machine that many people with MacBooks are, I could see dropping $6k.
I'm not, hence I have a $2k M1 MBA and remote into my gaming desktop for anything where speed matters.
My work flow is intensive yet critical:
I have at all times the following open:
ELECTRON APPS: Slack, Telegram, Teams, Discord, Git Kraken, VSCode (multiple workspaces hosting different repos all running webpack webservers with hot module reloading), Trading View.
NATIVE APPS: Firefox (10 - 32 tabs, many with live web socket connections such as stock trading sites, various web email providers, and at least one background YouTube video or twitch stream), Chrome (~6 tabs with alternate accounts using similar web socketed connections), iTerm, Torrent client (with multiple active transfers).
All of this is being displayed on two external 4k screens + the laptop.
So ya, I can justify maxxed out specs as my demands are far higher than that of an average user and that's with me actively closing things I don't need. Also my work will happily pay for it, so why not?
Not to mention if it makes a 200k salary worker 5% more productive, its a win. (Give or take for taxes.)