Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: I Deleted Nemo :-)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 20:19:29 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <vh67j1$2q1pl$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vh05m0$31lu$1@solani.org>
 <slrnvj7kcd.qfu1.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
 <27r7jj9j2vsfn50v9jv4hd7ea0na2gted8@4ax.com>
 <slrnvj8eij.1ma8f.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
 <jok8jjhosh645hsrrs9h761a33l4iv4cud@4ax.com>
 <slrnvj9dv3.2ncup.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
 <vh39re$2dt5j$3@dont-email.me> <vh490f$2mt78$3@dont-email.me>
 <vh54i6$2ptq3$1@dont-email.me> <vh62uh$32d1f$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2024 02:19:29 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c45cbbbd841b82c9473fa8ac7317f585";
	logging-data="2950965"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+hBlb9yZVZFVWtcbo9Yqg3lzngLd47iv4="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:8KzUitiScuwKJvvBCQHtNsH6UVo=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vh62uh$32d1f$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2839

On 11/14/24 7:00 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Nov 2024 10:21:42 -0500, -hh wrote:
> 
>> Today, Apple's M- architecture employs a unified memory configuration.
>> The tight integration significantly improves performance, but the
>> trade-off is that it isn't "old school" modular anymore.  I guess that
>> if you really wanted a RAM upgrade, you could swap out the whole CPU
>> package.
> 
> Which is why it’s an evolutionary dead-end. A friend suggested to me,
> around the time of the M1 chips, that the rest of the PC industry was
> going to follow Apple’s lead, but Intel has already admitted it was a
> mistake doing so, and is going back to modular memory.

It really depends on system level trades, and lifecycle contexts.

For example, the need for supporting incremental upgrades after 
deployment depends on the expected lifespan for which there will be 
software updates that could outgrow the original hardware, so when 
there's not much change in software across its useful lifespan, then 
there's not much need to support hardware changes (eg, upgrade RAM).

At that point, other value metrics such as lower manufacturing costs, 
higher reliability, etc, can prioritize solutions with lower parts 
counts and fewer discrete points of failure.  Adding a modular connector 
for RAM is an increase in parts count and decreases reliability.


-hh