Base m1 was like 4-5 years ago. did we have that much ram with oldest macs too, 30 years ago? 4-5 years at same base RAM is incredibly cheap behaviour from Apple. Some phones are literally close to that RAM now.
You could (unsupported) run 16gb ram on 2010 rMBP models, back before it was soldered on. Worked great, not to mention swapping the spinning drive for an SSD.
At this point, I get the soldered on ram, for better or worse... I do wish at least storage was more approachable.
It's just an entry on some computer. Maybe you can sell it on a secondary market, maybe you can't. You have to wait for an exit event - being acquired by someone else, or an IPO.
There in a Safari Controller that’s isolated from the app, but it’s presented within the app. If Apple can just mandate any web browsing activity must go through Safari Controller, it would stop all this nonsense from Facebook.
For the past 15 years, mobile has been the main revenue source for Facebook. As big as Facebook is, they're at the mercy of the 2 competitors: Apple and Google. Apple has been very hostile to Facebook, because Facebook make a shitload of money off Apple's platform and they refused to pay a certain percentage to Apple - unlike Google who is paying 20B a year to access iOS users. Apple tried to cut Facebook off with ATT on iOS 14, but it didn't work.
Because of this, Zuckerberg has to be incredibly paranoid about controlling his company destiny, to stop relying on others' platforms to deliver ads. It would be catastrophic for Facebook to not be a main player for the next computing platform, and they're currently making a lot of money from their other businesses. Zuckerberg is ruthless and he is paranoid, he has total control of Facebook and he will use all the resources to control the next big thing. I think it comes down to this: Zuckerberg believes it's cheaper to be wrong than to miss out on the next platform, and Facebook can afford to be wrong (to a certain extend).
> For the past 15 years, mobile has been the main revenue source for Facebook. As big as Facebook is, they're at the mercy of the 2 competitors
Before mobile was this big, Facebook tried their own platform and bottled it. This was during the period that the market was still diverse, with Windows phones, Blackberries, etc.
They also tried to make mobile web a thing for a few years past when it was obvious that native apps were the way forward.
Facebook certainly did not have the resources and experiences to make a mobile OS at that point. Microsoft tried and failed, there was no space for a 3rd mobile OS.
> They also tried to make mobile web a thing for a few years past when it was obvious that native apps were the way forward.
This was one of the first friction Facebook encountered with Apple. They wanted to make their own store in the Facebook app on iOS, but obviously Apple said no. Maybe doing Facebook app in HTML5 was a way to protest against the way Apple was moving things forward, but again it didn't work, their app was crap and they rewrote everything in native.
I might not remember well but I thought the App Store on windows phone was super lacking and actively falling further behind despite a bunch of efforts to prop it up.
Not commenting on if the phones were good / used I never had one :) just trying to remember the state of things back then
I think you have it backwards. Because iOS/macOS can run fine on what Intel fabs can make right now, Apple is not totally dependent on TSMC. In the worst case scenario, they will simply buy all the capacity from Intel, they have enough cash to do so.
Nvidia on the other hand need the latest tech to squeeze the most performance out of their chips for AI companies.
But Intel don't manufacture any ARM mobile SoCs that would be suitable for iPhones and iPads? It's not just a case of "upload A18 design, press print". It is at least a year or two of getting the processes up and running and validated.
So if TSMC went down tomorrow, you can't exactly phone Intel up and say "hi we need 1billion m-series chips a year, starting in a few weeks?"
If they owned it they could start doing that in the background.
> This happens on EBay too. Sellers list something and it isn't as described, and fraudulent sellers will say "but it is! This buyer is trying to scam me." and EBay usually sides with the seller.
This is not my experience at all and I've used eBay since 2008. eBay is pro buyer to the point that I don't sell anything on eBay (and buy all everything on eBay if price is the same).
Sell on eBay and can confirm this. eBay will side with the buyer 95% of the time, even if we can prove it was their fault. Maybe they side with scam sellers more.
The MBPs didn’t run too hot, the Nvidia GPUs used an underfill that stopped providing structural support at a relatively normal temperature for GPUs (60-80 degrees C).
GPU failures due to this also happened on Dell/HP/Sony laptops, some desktop models, as well as early models of the PS3.
Yes I'm not claiming it's ideal, it'd be nice not to worry about such things as a tourist, it can't be that hard or expensive for Google to just let everyone use the feature.
But at least if you move to Japan, you can essentially get a Japanese flavored Pixel at the small cost of a factory unlock/relock.
reply