Re: [NEWS] M4 is dead ... M5 is coming

On 2025-03-20 03:44:49 +0000, Johnny LaRue said:

In article <vrfcti$1na48$1@dont-email.me>,
 Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

On 2025-03-19 15:50:32 +0000, Anonymous said:

Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

On 2025-02-22, WolfFan <akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:

On Feb 5, 2025, Your Name wrote
(in article <vo0hjg$2hn1r$1@dont-email.me>):

 If you just bought a new M4 iPad or Mac, then you've been scammed.
The new M5 chips are coming this year ... and no doubt the M6 will
arrive next year.

 Hmm. I bought an M2 iPad Air. It was fast enough, and, more
importantly, cheap enough, for my purposes. In a few years I’ll
probably replace it with whatever’s current then.
 This is being typed on a 2014 Mac mini. It still works. I will
probably be replacing it with a M4 unit later this year, and will keep
that one for a decade, too.
 I have no particular desire for new shiny, as long as current systems
work.

 That's pretty common amongst Mac users. But claiming people who bought a
M4 Mac was "scammed" just because Apple dared to update the Mac line
with faster processors is downright loony. ?
 People who bought last year's Macs weren't scammed.  Apple just
refreshed some Macs, as usual.

 Wasn’t the big complaint that Apple updated their hardware too slowly?

 Only by fools blinded by the silly "megahertz myth" asnd the geek
brigade who always want a new shiny toy to play with.
  

Well, that’s not the case anymore. The refresh cycle is just a little too
fast now,

 It isn't just Apple either. Samsung, etc. all update their devices
every year (at least) with little more than minor tweaks and pointless
gimmickry.
 You then have most of the software developers that enforce their apps
to only run on the latest and greatest hardware and operating systems.
 Combined, that induces a constant enforced upgrade cycle (at least for
those with more money than sense) and simply ends up with huge piles of
perfectly good devices being thrown out as e-waste every year.
  

but if the performance gain is worth it I say “Go for it!”

 Most users' needs are extremely simple and peak performance for them
was reached years ago - there is a limit as to how fast you can type in
MS Word or move the mouse cursor. They have no real need for today's
massively fast devices, other than to keep it running at a decent speed
despite all the unnecessary gimmicks companies keep adding to them.

 None of that even matters.   If you need a new phone, you get a new
phone.  End of discussion.

Exactly, but most people do not need (many don't even want) a "faster", "bigger" "better" one ... they simply want one that works for what they want to do. In fact many would prefer the same model simply because that's what they're used to using, and when they are forced to buy a new one it is usually quite different and has lots of useless features they'll never use, which is frustrating and annoying.
The average user is not like the uber-geek that invents all these silly features nor like the nerd brigade that salivates every time a new phone has a few more useless megapixels. Those that do want such software features should be able to simply download an app to do it, while everyone else gets a simple, efficient device, not clogged up with a load of stuff they'll never use or even notice.

Most people don't need all of the features/capabilities of new cars
either.  But if you need a new car, you get a new car.   End of
discussion.

Most people do not know, let alone use, all the fancy gimmickry on their car or their devices. A lot of that gimmickry can often be plain annoying. They just want something that works simply and usably.

The people who get a new phone every year are the same people who get a
new car every year.   People with lots of money.  Nothing wrong with
that.   That's the whole point of having lots of money.
 I have an iPhone 12 Pro Max.   It still works fine.    When I need a new
one it will be the newest biggest bestest iPhone.   Because I am not
interested in the cheapest iPhone.

Depends on how you define "need".
If the phone breaks, then you do need a new one.
If the telecoms company decides they no longer want to support 2G, then *you* don't need a new phone, you're forced into buying a new phone.
If the developer of an app you use decides you're phone is "too old" to support, then *you* do not need a new phone, you're forced into buying a new phone.
It is most easily seen in the games industry ... why does a version of Tetris now "need" an M4 CPU Mac with 32GB RAM when the same game ran perfectly well on a Commodore 64 decades ago? The fact is it doesn't, but by enforcing that "minimum spec" you are again being pushed into the ever-upgrade cycle.

Because I have SOME money.  Not LOTS of money.
 And there is no "e-waste".  I sell the old one on eBay.   Because there
are LOTS of people who want an iPhone but can't afford a new one.  I
know that because I used to be one.   And since pristine used iPhones
(mine are always in a case so no scratches/dents at all) get top
dollars, it helps to offset the price of the new one.
 Win-win.

Big business companies continually release tweaked models every year simply because far too many people are stupid enough to keep wasting their money buying every new model, even though their current device is still perfectly fine. That's how big business makes their money.
If people didn't keep buying the latest toy and were satisfied with their current device, the companies wouldn't keep doing it. With the ever-increasing prices of everything these days, more and more people are finally relaising they don't need to keep upgrading constantly.