For the past 10 years, I've documented everything I've learned on any topics, most often non-technical ones. Whenever I revisit a topic, I refine and update my knowledge base. I use a private github repo with textual files. This has helped to increase my knowledge tremendously.
It looked good initially and I actually used it for a while, but it's scammy AF now with data siphoning, forced usage, weird integrations with lenders, etc.
I'm also predicting there will be no difference in battery life.
If you check technical specifications on past MBP battery specification and battery life you can notice one thing: Watt/hour battery is always decreasing and battery life is always remaining constant (e.g., 10 hours of web scrolling).
Gain in power consumption allows to reduce component space which allows further slimmer designs.
Linus Tech Tips recently published a video where they did all kinds of cooling hacks to a Macbook Air, including milling out the CPU heat sink, adding thermal pads to dissipate heat into the chassis (instead of insulating the chassis from the heat), and using a water block to cool the chassis with ice water.
They got pretty dramatic results from the first few options, but it topped out at the thermal pads and nothing else made any difference at all. Their conclusion was that the way the system was built, there was an upper limit on the power the system could consistently provide to the CPU, and no amount of cooling would make any difference after that point.
The obvious conclusion for me was that Apple made decisions based on battery life and worked backwards from there, choosing a chip that fell within the desired range, designing a cooling system that was good enough for that ballpark, and providing just enough power to the CPU/GPU package to hit the upper end of the range.
It could just as well have been, choose a pref level and assure it will run for 10 hours...
It actually good engineering to have all the components balanced. If you overbuilt the VRM's for a CPU that would never utilize the current, its just wasted cost.
OTOH, maybe they were downsizing the batteries to keep it at 10H so they could be like "look we extended the battery to 16 hours with our new chips" while also bumping the battery capacity.
> The 16" MacBook Pro, for example, has a 100 Wh battery, which is the largest that Apple has ever shipped in a laptop. This is the largest battery size permitted in cabin baggage on flights.
I agree battery life for casual workloads will probably stay the same. However, if CPU power consumption decreases relative to other components, battery life on heavy workloads should go up.
My new 16“ MBP is good for 2-2.5h max when used for working on big projects in Xcode. I expect to almost double that with the new CPUs. The people who have exactly this problem are also those who buy the most expensive hardware from Apple.
This isn't always true. The 16" MacBook Pro, for example, has a 100 Wh battery, which is the largest that Apple has ever shipped in a laptop. This is the largest battery size permitted in cabin baggage on flights.
Great, they can make the laptops even slimmer. They're going to make them so thin they won't be able to put a USB-C port and use wireless charging. You'll soon learn that you don't actually need to plug anything into your device. Apple knows best.
I heard many times people mentioning this book but I also heard it is not very readable. Could somebody explain for people without a degree in philosophy like me what are the main ideas that are exposed in this book?
