I am not very active in this community but I recently came here to decide between an M1 or M2.

However, I noticed there are countless threads on MacBook Air vs. Pro. In my opinion, with each passing day, the Air line-up will become more dominant than the Pro line-up for this very simple reason; local computing is dying.

The era of local computing is coming to an end. In the enterprise world, this shift started quite a while ago. With the rise of AWS, Azure, and Google cloud, an increasing number of organizations and processes have shifted to cloud computing. In personal computing we see the same thing; Google docs and Office 365 for document editing, GeForce Now for gaming, and tons of other examples.

Instead of focusing on the local powerful machine, the focus will be on a fast internet connection + good screen & keyboard.

Of course, today there are still plenty of use cases where local computing is key such as photo/video editing, app development and much more. But the shift is clearly visible; whatever is done locally today might shift to cloud-based tomorrow.

Paying for subscriptions sucks, but luckily in return you will only pay for the computing when you need it and most likely it will be top of the line at all times.

Consequently, buying powerful machines will become less interesting as the shift continues. In my industry (data), this is already perfectly applicable. Why would I buy a heavy and bulky Pro device if all my computing is done on remote AWS instances? My device is only used to talk to remote instances, hence a MacBook Air.

In summary, local power is becoming less important every day. The future of computing are light machines with fast internet connections.

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.

TED talk lmao.

Put that aside, I want to ask you one question: how are you going to edit a document that is stored in the cloud during a flight? Right now, many people’s modern computer can run some form of editing software that suits their needs. All it needs is downloading the file beforehand and like nothing happens. Within your scenario, that person would not be able to make any changes until he stumbles into a place where internet is available.

Another problem is internet quality and reliability. You probably have no idea how fragile our current internet infrastructure is nowadays. Full of holes and issues, hacking everywhere, plus low quality internet because ISP doesn’t want to spend money to serve those 100 people living 200km away from major city. Satellite can help but that Carrie’s their own limits as well. Unless everyone on earth can have 100% uninterrupted access of internet 24*7, cloud computing will always be a supplement rather than mainstream.

One more problem is putting all eggs in one basket. How many companies in the world that can offer world class level of cloud computing with quality service and good track record? A handful, right? Those are some big old targets in their back. If something happens, consequence is catastrophic. Decentralisation is there to counter this scenario, so at least service is More resilient. Let‘s also not forget about privacy concern in cloud computing.

Geforce NOW? Check stadia. GeForce NOW would follow suit soon enough if not careful.

What I believe is local computing will continue to Complement cloud computing for decades to come, with the built-in advantage of data safety, privacy-oriented, and complete control of your data, while cloud computing support businesses and individuals with computing needs that are otherwise too costly to build workstation for. It’s similar to the arguments between wired charging And wireless charging. They can’t replace each other, but complement each other.

Thanks for coming to my TED talk (puns intended)

Shirasaki said:

TED talk lmao.

Put that aside, I want to ask you one question: how are you going to edit a document that is stored in the cloud during a flight? Right now, many people’s modern computer can run some form of editing software that suits their needs. All it needs is downloading the file beforehand and like nothing happens. Within your scenario, that person would not be able to make any changes until he stumbles into a place where internet is available.

Another problem is internet quality and reliability. You probably have no idea how fragile our current internet infrastructure is nowadays. Full of holes and issues, hacking everywhere, plus low quality internet because ISP doesn’t want to spend money to serve those 100 people living 200km away from major city. Satellite can help but that Carrie’s their own limits as well. Unless everyone on earth can have 100% uninterrupted access of internet 24*7, cloud computing will always be a supplement rather than mainstream.

One more problem is putting all eggs in one basket. How many companies in the world that can offer world class level of cloud computing with quality service and good track record? A handful, right? Those are some big old targets in their back. If something happens, consequence is catastrophic. Decentralisation is there to counter this scenario, so at least service is More resilient. Let‘s also not forget about privacy concern in cloud computing.

Geforce NOW? Check stadia. GeForce NOW would follow suit soon enough if not careful.

What I believe is local computing will continue to Complement cloud computing for decades to come, with the built-in advantage of data safety, privacy-oriented, and complete control of your data, while cloud computing support businesses and individuals with computing needs that are otherwise too costly to build workstation for. It’s similar to the arguments between wired charging And wireless charging. They can’t replace each other, but complement each other.

Thanks for coming to my TED talk (puns intended)

Click to expand...

I largely agree with your analysis.

But don't get me wrong, I am not making a case against local computing. All I am saying is that the use cases decrease day by day.

You make a good point about internet reliability, but I think you also may be overestimating it. I believe we are already hugely dependent on the internet for productivity. Furthermore, with 5G and future technologies connectivity and speed are only increasing.

Lastly; " A handful, right? Those are some big old targets in their back. If something happens, consequence is catastrophic." . Often the idea of moving to the public cloud is to mitigate risks of catastrophic events by setting geo-redundancy.

Long story short, I agree with your view of both technologies complementing each other. However, the balance will definitely shift to more cloud and less local making light devices like an Air more attractive.

Mr West said:

I largely agree with your analysis.

But don't get me wrong, I am not making a case against local computing. All I am saying is that the use cases decrease day by day.

You make a good point about internet reliability, but I think you also may be overestimating it. I believe we are already hugely dependent on the internet for productivity. Furthermore, with 5G and future technologies connectivity and speed are only increasing.

Lastly; " A handful, right? Those are some big old targets in their back. If something happens, consequence is catastrophic." . Often the idea of moving to the public cloud is to mitigate risks of catastrophic events by setting geo-redundancy.

Long story short, I agree with your view of both technologies complementing each other. However, the balance will definitely shift to more cloud and less local making light devices like an Air more attractive.

Click to expand...

Well, my view is cloud computing would continue to complement local computing but powerful local device would still take the lead. Here’s a simple example: for cloud gaming, the most obvious offloaded burden is the need for powerful gaming computer. However, devices with weak local computing may still struggle to display the streamed gameplay, pickup and manage input, as well as sending them back to The cloud for processing. It’s not just about delay.

Google shutting down Stadia despite several people claiming their cloud gaming experience is the best means cloud computing for masses may not be there, at the least yet. Game has to be optimised, streaming service provider need to deal with the licensing issue, hardware maintenance of large scale. People keep touting cloud gaming is the future, I see it as the same way wireless charging is “the future” argument.

Secondly, you mention going to public cloud is to mitigate the catastrophic events by setting geo-redundancy. For personal use or even small business use, maybe yes. Once you reach a scale and having to deal with international collaboration, geo-redundancy is no longer a valid argument. Also, geo-redundancy implies multiple copies of your data, which costs money to store and maintain, not to mention needing to build more data centers should space run out for server racks. The ideal data center locations are already scarce as-is, people flocking to the cloud would put enormous pressure on server infrastructure, let alone bandwidth requirements and so on.

Last but not least, MacBook Air being more popular doesn’t have to do with the seemingly increasing popularly of cloud computing (which I doubt). Low-power high-performance light-weight laptop can almost always win customers assuming matching build quality and price. Cloud computing, if anything, would not necessarily make macbook air like devices more popular, but “one more thing” those already powerful laptop can do.

If the era of local computing is ending then things like Mac Chromebooks will dominate. Minimum OS and a browser. The rest resides in the cloud. Closer to a phone operation with a keyboard and bigger display and minimal maintenance.

Steve Jobs himself thought this was the direction that most computing and storage of files would inevitably go, all the way back in 1997. He thought it would have happened much sooner. Still hasn't happened to the degree he mentioned here outside of enterprise. It's one of those things that makes sense on paper, but humans illogical brains enjoy their computing in a different way.

Interesting watch, for sure!

TSE said:

Steve Jobs himself thought this was the direction that most computing and storage of files would inevitably go, all the way back in 1997. He thought it would have happened much sooner. Still hasn't happened to the degree he mentioned here outside of enterprise. It's one of those things that makes sense on paper, but humans illogical brains enjoy their computing in a different way.

Interesting watch, for sure!

Click to expand...

Probably because cloud computing leans so heavily on fast, low latency internet connections. Silicon Valley was quite possibly almost there already in the late 90s, while for a lot of the world (even in 'developed countries) it's still a nonstarter.

Falhófnir said:

Probably because cloud computing leans so heavily on fast, low latency internet connections. Silicon Valley was quite possibly almost there already in the late 90s, while for a lot of the world (even in 'developed countries) it's still a nonstarter.

Yeah, this is one of the cases where he and his engineers were probably in their own bubble that is disconnected to the reality of the rest of the world.

Mr West said:

I am not very active in this community but I recently came here to decide between an M1 or M2.

However, I noticed there are countless threads on MacBook Air vs. Pro. In my opinion, with each passing day, the Air line-up will become more dominant than the Pro line-up for this very simple reason; local computing is dying.

The era of local computing is coming to an end. In the enterprise world, this shift started quite a while ago. With the rise of AWS, Azure, and Google cloud, an increasing number of organizations and processes have shifted to cloud computing. In personal computing we see the same thing; Google docs and Office 365 for document editing, GeForce Now for gaming, and tons of other examples.

Instead of focusing on the local powerful machine, the focus will be on a fast internet connection + good screen & keyboard.

Of course, today there are still plenty of use cases where local computing is key such as photo/video editing, app development and much more. But the shift is clearly visible; whatever is done locally today might shift to cloud-based tomorrow.

Paying for subscriptions sucks, but luckily in return you will only pay for the computing when you need it and most likely it will be top of the line at all times.

Consequently, buying powerful machines will become less interesting as the shift continues. In my industry (data), this is already perfectly applicable. Why would I buy a heavy and bulky Pro device if all my computing is done on remote AWS instances? My device is only used to talk to remote instances, hence a MacBook Air.

In summary, local power is becoming less important every day. The future of computing are light machines with fast internet connections.

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.

Click to expand...

I wish the Air would overtake the Pro (in local computing power) but it wont. Local *storage* is being discouraged for the masses by Apple. They discourage it with high SSD prices and promotion of the Cloud, combined with various kinks in Mac OS that make it harder to use SSDs for things like iCloud Photos Libraries.

But there are more people who need to edit photos and videos locally than you estimate.

Every time the Air has gotten a boost, the Pro also gets a boost--and the computing requirements get a boost because of advances in cameras (eg 5k video), 5k external displays, etc.

For the foreseeable future we will need computers with a fan and powerful processors separate from a line of lightweight fanless ones, unfortunately. Until nanotech chip manufacturing advances further. And if that occurs it wont be the death of local computing, it will be the advancement of local computing to the point where smaller profiles and fanless designs are possible for virtually all use cases

Mr West said:

I am not very active in this community but I recently came here to decide between an M1 or M2.

However, I noticed there are countless threads on MacBook Air vs. Pro. In my opinion, with each passing day, the Air line-up will become more dominant than the Pro line-up for this very simple reason; local computing is dying.

The era of local computing is coming to an end. In the enterprise world, this shift started quite a while ago. With the rise of AWS, Azure, and Google cloud, an increasing number of organizations and processes have shifted to cloud computing. In personal computing we see the same thing; Google docs and Office 365 for document editing, GeForce Now for gaming, and tons of other examples.

Instead of focusing on the local powerful machine, the focus will be on a fast internet connection + good screen & keyboard.

Of course, today there are still plenty of use cases where local computing is key such as photo/video editing, app development and much more. But the shift is clearly visible; whatever is done locally today might shift to cloud-based tomorrow.

Paying for subscriptions sucks, but luckily in return you will only pay for the computing when you need it and most likely it will be top of the line at all times.

Consequently, buying powerful machines will become less interesting as the shift continues. In my industry (data), this is already perfectly applicable. Why would I buy a heavy and bulky Pro device if all my computing is done on remote AWS instances? My device is only used to talk to remote instances, hence a MacBook Air.

In summary, local power is becoming less important every day. The future of computing are light machines with fast internet connections.

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.

Click to expand...

I have a different take on this but your initial point I agree with.

As far as the cloud goes it serves a purpose and for its purpose it can't be replaced and is extremely useful but the same is true for local storage. I don't think one of either can replace the other-ever. You need both and everyone needs a mix of both depending on their specific needs and that varies a lot.

However the need for Pro machines is diminishing as cpu become faster and more efficient. An older M1 8 core chip is more powerful than most gaming laptops from a few years ago with integrated graphics that are as good as older basic dedicated mobile GPU. Some M1 Airs outperform Intel MacBook Pro's with dedicated GPU from a few years ago or at least as good.

As time goes on this trend will only continue. Not that the Pro models won't scale up and be more powerful too but that as the basic chips improve to such a degree most people simply won't need the Pro level of computational power.

People were basically comparing an M2 MBA to an M1 14" MBP and doing some of the same tasks with decent results. Obviously the Pro machines are better and can do more but the point is that even trying Pro level work on an air type laptop several years ago would have been laughed at even considering much less doing.

Local power and local storage will always be needed and utilized. But as cpu become more powerful and have better integrated graphics and faster ram more people will be able to do more with traditionally less powerful devices.

We aren't there yet. Once Cpu's hit under 1nm and ram is at ddr7 then a regular non pro m series chip will be as powerful or more so than a current M1 Pro/Max. I am just guessing here but I think you get my point. A thin and light laptop without a fan will be so powerful that unless you are doing super intensive workloads you just aren't going to need a Pro device.

Of course the definition of Pro encompasses more than local storage and cpu power with extras like better screens and more ports but concepts of the past where just to get a laptop with decent performance you need a Pro machine or workstation or gaming laptop are going to be obsolete thinking.

I think this is great as it means people will be able to spend less and still have great performance. I remember the days of the first Intel core cpu dual core with terrible integrated graphics super slow performance and average to bad battery life. You had to get a gaming laptop with a quad core just to not have to wait forever to get anything done. I am so glad those days are gone!!

Technerd108 said:

I have a different take on this but your initial point I agree with.

As far as the cloud goes it serves a purpose and for its purpose it can't be replaced and is extremely useful but the same is true for local storage. I don't think one of either can replace the other-ever. You need both and everyone needs a mix of both depending on their specific needs and that varies a lot.

However the need for Pro machines is diminishing as cpu become faster and more efficient. An older M1 8 core chip is more powerful than most gaming laptops from a few years ago with integrated graphics that are as good as older basic dedicated mobile GPU. Some M1 Airs outperform Intel MacBook Pro's with dedicated GPU from a few years ago or at least as good.

As time goes on this trend will only continue. Not that the Pro models won't scale up and be more powerful too but that as the basic chips improve to such a degree most people simply won't need the Pro level of computational power.

People were basically comparing an M2 MBA to an M1 14" MBP and doing some of the same tasks with decent results. Obviously the Pro machines are better and can do more but the point is that even trying Pro level work on an air type laptop several years ago would have been laughed at even considering much less doing.

Local power and local storage will always be needed and utilized. But as cpu become more powerful and have better integrated graphics and faster ram more people will be able to do more with traditionally less powerful devices.

We aren't there yet. Once Cpu's hit under 1nm and ram is at ddr7 then a regular non pro m series chip will be as powerful or more so than a current M1 Pro/Max. I am just guessing here but I think you get my point. A thin and light laptop without a fan will be so powerful that unless you are doing super intensive workloads you just aren't going to need a Pro device.

Of course the definition of Pro encompasses more than local storage and cpu power with extras like better screens and more ports but concepts of the past where just to get a laptop with decent performance you need a Pro machine or workstation or gaming laptop are going to be obsolete thinking.

I think this is great as it means people will be able to spend less and still have great performance. I remember the days of the first Intel core cpu dual core with terrible integrated graphics super slow performance and average to bad battery life. You had to get a gaming laptop with a quad core just to not have to wait forever to get anything done. I am so glad those days are gone!!

Click to expand...

I generally agree and wish for the day when an ultralight can do what the m1max etc can, and yea it’ll happen. BUT remember, when that day comes, 6k or 8k monitors will become what a standard 4k monitor is today. And the latest cameras wont shoot 5k video, they’ll shoot 9k lol

As the chips improve, so will the demands our work will make on them. The experience will be way cooler but I think the companies will keep us paying for expensive devices for some time. The only way out is to be very deliberate about your purchases and your workflow and closely consider your needs.