non Apple consumers were already used to this clown fiesta since AMD processors had late access to SoTA nodes for the very same reason.

And possibly other types of hardware also had price bumped or used outdated chips because Apple has to build their iPhone/mac n+1.

That's why you see some folks actually mocking Apple about the situation. They were already affected.

If anything this might force a market-wide fix in the medium term.

Plus... Apple kinda wastes it. Not to be judgy, but we don't need 2nm chips to hardware-accelerate Netflix and Pornhub. The iPhone is locked-down, there's no worry that it will be a poor gaming platform or disrupt valuable workflows. A new iPhone chip means nothing anymore.

Between the $99/year sideloading, Liquid Glass and fighting fruitlessly against CUDA, I think Apple needs a break to reflect on why their software strategy is so unpopular with everyone. The hardware advances are doing them more harm than good at this point.

someone has a larger pile of cash now

> In my 3-hour tests, Safari consumed 18.67% of my battery each time on average, and Chrome averaged 17.33% battery drain. That works out to about 9% less battery drain from Chrome than Safari. Yes, you read that right, I found Chrome was easier on my battery than Safari.

With how much engineering was poured over V8, I don't doubt.

customers will pay the bill so it doesn't matter

Trucks in general are doomed to decline in sales.

Meanwhile they're so high value, organised criminals are stealing them from driveways and shipping them to middle east: https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/family-...

For code? There's Gemini 3 Pro and GPT 5.2.

(in my experience, for my C#/TypeScript usecases, Opus 4.5 still ahead inside VSCode Copilot because it is more obedient with regards to tool calling).

don't bother. Your parent commenter is writing some loaded comments in this post.

Perhaps writing code by hand will be considered micro optimisation in the future.

Just like writing assembly is today.

This is also bad evangelism, but on opposite side.

Just because LLMs don't work for you outside of vibe-coding, doesn't mean it's the same for everyone.

> LLM evangelists - are you willing to admit that you just might not be that good at programming computers?

Productive usage of LLMs in large scale projects become viable with excellent engineering (tests, patterns, documentation, clean code) so perhaps that question should also be asked to yourself.

I think you should read the article again, because this comment is a straw man vis-a-vis the article.

No it doesn't.

It starts from the premise that the author finds LLMs are good for limited, simple tasks with small contexts and clearly defined guidelines, and specifically not good for vibe-coding.

And the author literally mentions that they aren't making universal claims about LLMs, but just speaking from personal experience.

You're offering a very generous interpretation. To the point of extrapolating what's written. Allow me to exemplify:

> I genuinely don't mind if other people vibe code. Go for it!

> But that is not enough for the vocal proponents. It's the future!

The author is okay for others to voice their positive opinion about LLMs as long as it is limited to vibe coding.

It starts defining a gatekeeping threshold of what level of positive opinion is acceptable for others to have, according to the author.

Nothing in the text you quoted implies anything of the sort, and you're moving the goalposts.

Good day.

> all the complaints about firefox are mostly ego-deflection.

Sorry this is too handwavy for me.

According to this logic, Mozilla is likely going to die believing it did nothing wrong.