Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Two points
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 08:01:15 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 63
Message-ID: <vikb2r$3ahk8$1@dont-email.me>
References: <lqu2q4Fa9h6U1@mid.individual.net> <vidd61$18mjb$5@dont-email.me>
 <viidfc$2ntnt$1@dont-email.me> <viivs8$2t3h9$2@dont-email.me>
 <vij74v$2trqh$1@dont-email.me> <vijhg6$34qql$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2024 14:01:16 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6f6233648ceeb90e0a4bc9169881c6bd";
	logging-data="3491464"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+yhO/uHxrtPyosQaNuFuU7IcM58dGLtQI="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:fvTGD/nxOFsC/rixVGKs2bdMi4g=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vijhg6$34qql$3@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3693

On 12/2/24 12:44 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sun, 1 Dec 2024 21:47:59 -0500, -hh wrote:
> 
>> On 12/1/24 7:43 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Sun, 1 Dec 2024 14:29:48 -0500, -hh wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/29/24 4:54 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 29 Nov 2024 14:52:53 GMT, vallor wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) I own two Mac mini's, which are sitting in a drawer.  They were
>>>>>> made from notebook equipment, and they are crap.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since they switched to ARM, everything named “Mac” from Apple is now
>>>>> a glorified notebook anyway.
>>>>
>>>> Which makes it sound like notebooks haven't advanced in the past 20
>>>> years to be as powerful as many desktops.
>>>
>>> They are fundamentally compromised just from the form factor.
>>
>> Your opinion doesn't really matter, because Free Market decided a long
>> time ago that notebooks had passed the 'Good Enough' test ...
> 
> I’m sure the market likes them a lot, but the market cannot change the
> laws of physics either: I can always do more with the resources of a
> desktop than I can with an equivalently-specced laptop, if I don’t need
> the mobility of the latter.
> 
>> First, it's not you, but the user's workflow which determines what the
>> sustained load may be.
> 
> I do content creation a fair bit. 

Everyone does content creation, even if its just text for a USENET post. 
  That creation has been the same since a 1200 baud VT100 40 years ago.

So if you're going to posture that you need moar power, what's the 
content that's allegedly your stressor?  And what tools do you use to 
objectively evaluate and compare different hardware/software solutions 
to know that you're not sucking on snake oil?

For example, if your content is video, is it 1080p?  Or 4K?  Or 6K?  Or 
8K ProRes 422 HQ?  For benchmarking tools, are you using Cinebench, or 
the Blackmagic test Apps (disk speed, RAW speed)?  If not, why not 
because these are free downloads.

Case in point, some "notebook" CPUs:

<https://www.reddit.com/r/macbookpro/comments/17pge6k/m1m3_cpu_performance_chart_using_cinebench_r23/>


> Sure, most users aren’t doing that. Most
> users don’t need workstations, either.

Precisely why I noted that performance levels of even today's notebooks 
have passed the 'Good Enough' test...

.... and just because you have some workflow which allegedly stresses 
State of the Shelf doesn't mean that you're representative of the 
mainstream: it means that you're a minority niche.

-hh