They haven't fixed the bug I've had since Tahoe, where Dock icons render with no anti-aliasing. I thought they had as everything was rendering correctly when I first installed the update, but after my first reboot they're back to a pixelated mess. It looks awful.
What's worse is that, while I can find other reports online, it doesn't seem to be a particularly widespread bug (my work Mac doesn't exhibit it at all), which means I'm probably gonna have to wait for it to be fixed incidentally when some Apple engineer makes an unrelated change to the Dock codebase in about four years time.
I skipped Tahoe and was surprised to have pixelated dock icons now all of a sudden. Bad news I guess that the bug is existing for so long already - I was hoping it's new and temporary.
Are you sure it wasn’t just the TV? Unless someone put it into filmmaker mode or similar, it almost certainly would have had motion interpolation enabled, as well as a blue white-point, oversaturated colours, and probably some artificial sharpening and de-noising.
The M1 Macs were a bit different because Apple had already been designing their own CPUs for years, and the machine designs themselves were almost identical to previous iterations with Intel CPUs. The only thing they needed to get right was the software, which they did (and which could have been updated after the fact if they didn’t).
I’m in the exact same situation. Been upgrading every year for a long time (via the Upgrade Programme, making doing so more or less “free”). I was absolutely jazzed they finally did an orange phone, and this is the first year in a while that…I just don’t care. The Duo is far more expensive than I could ever entertain (plus buying a first-gen Apple product has never been a good idea), and there is quite literally nothing in the 18 Pro that makes me want to upgrade.
I may be swayed by a second gen Air in the spring, as I would like a lighter phone that feels less of an imposition in my pocket and my life in general. But it almost certainly won’t have the zoom camera, which has unexpectedly become one of my favourite and most used features of the 17 Pro. Why the two-camera phones all come with the ultrawide instead of the telephoto is baffling to me. Perhaps I’m an anomaly, but I never use the ultrawide lens.
Why do you think I put “free” in quotes? Realistically I was never going to keep the phone longer than the two year finance term anyway, because back when I started doing it a two-year old phone would be really starting to show its age running newer software. So I could either pay monthly and get a phone every two years, or pay monthly and get a phone every year.
Of course, these days a three or four or more year old phone is often still perfectly usable even for a tech enthusiast.
I’m not so sure personally. A MacBook Air is not that much less portable than an iPad, but is far more useful for work when not docked than an iPad because it still has a keyboard and a precision pointing device. And it can still be docked when you need a bigger screen.
The areas where the iPad beats the MacBook are still (imo) the same as the day it launched: web browsing, watching video, and reading. Workloads that are heavy on the Apple Pencil too, but that’s a fairly narrow slice compared to anything else you might do on a computer.
I mean my iPad Pro + Magic Keyboard case has fully replaced my Mac for everything. I haven’t touched my Mac in months. I literally do all of my work via GitHub Codespaces (soon to be self-hosted Coder). Yes it’s not all on device but it works (for me).
I don’t see anything in my use case that I’d gain from a MacBook over this setup.
Yeah I used a Magic Keyboard myself for a while but I found it significantly impacted what I liked about the iPad. It doubled the weight, and removed the ability to hold it in my hand or in portrait (still the most common orientation I use mine). Sure you can take it out any time, but I found it just added a lot of extra friction to a device that previously had very little (iPadOS aside). Glad it’s working well for you though.
> As for documentation, I've found this simple instruction to vastly improve LLMs' output:
> Never write READMEs, docstrings, or comments. I will write those myself later. And yes, I really mean this.
This is quite validating as I came to the exact same conclusion myself. We’re required to use an LLM for every task at work that touches code†, and I was really struggling to get Claude to stop with the long waffly comments that reiterate the next few lines of code in 3x as many characters, making contextless references to subtasks in whatever harness du jour we’re using this week.
No amount of examples or explanation of what I wanted would make it stop. And then I realised of course, I’m asking something which has no concept of meaning (or, indeed, anything) to only add meaningful comments. More fool me I guess.
Of course, it’s ultimately pointless given all of my colleagues are regularly opening PRs with more comments than code anyway. 80% of my code review responses these days are just increasingly exasperated “pointless comment, please remove”.
† This is just as infantilising as it sounds, by the way
+10, I can't stand AI-generated comments. Half the time they are paragraph-length translations of every 5 lines of code into English prose, or just regurgitating whatever prompt they were given. When they actually try making high level comments they are worse than useless. It's really hard to put into words exactly why. It's something about how they are very verbose, but at the same time vague and stated in a slightly-off manner. Or they will introduce new terminology not reflected in the code's nomenclature, sometimes terms that are just synonyms for terms that the code already uses. Something about it makes me instantly distrustful of any information the comment may actually convey.
locally correct and globally incoherent is how they seem to me. I, and a number of folks I have talked to, find some of them incomprehensible. Like each sentence makes sense, but the overall thing does not.
It's because they don't really have a mental model. RL with Verifiable Rewards can reward working code, but it can't tell you whether the prose make sense or not. In theory RLHF should be good with this. In practice, it appears to be a measure difficult to quantify and steer. I am not an insider though. So it's just a theory.
I have the same impression. It is an interesting phenomenon. Is it one of the ways we will gradually learn that AI in the form of LLMs is fundamentally lacking?
I use AI all the time, it gives a tremendous boost in speed for many tasks and it is most certainly here to stay, but there is something off about certain things, like code comments. Like a weird person.
I kind of wander if the comments are intentionally bad, providing programmers something to bike shed about. A sneakier approach to the flattery the models used to so use so heavily.
You can create a PostToolUse hook [0] which will automatically chastise Claude to shrink comments to one line. It's not perfect but better than the sea of prose it tends to generate by default. Bonus is that it would apply to your colleagues as well!
I have the opposite problem with Code, it barely writes any comments even for fairly complex C++ code blocks (systems programming stuff), have to prompt it to add extra details about why it did something. Request in agents.md doesn't seem to help much.
I'm in the same boat. We have very little documentation where I work, and one of my goals was to improve that as I got onboard. We have a newer dev that started ripping +3K, +5K, +10K line PRs against our documentation repository.
I have tried to shut it down, it immediately nullifies the docs and make it genuine slop.
I truly believe that documentation should be human written and human readable. It's all of the stuff that AI does NOT pick up on. Small inconsistencies, only the necessary details. IE: Don't just rewrite the code that we have into readable english (We are software developers after all. We can read code.) - comments / documentation to me has always been the "in between the lines" stuff that can't be put into the code.
What's worse is that, while I can find other reports online, it doesn't seem to be a particularly widespread bug (my work Mac doesn't exhibit it at all), which means I'm probably gonna have to wait for it to be fixed incidentally when some Apple engineer makes an unrelated change to the Dock codebase in about four years time.
reply