doomroot13

Yes, but also in combination with the not-borderline-and-actually insane growth in commits and load on the platform due to AI.

I don't think that's actually the case. There were some rumors flying around about this but in their recent event they actually referred to Copilot+ PCs as generally the line targeting more casual users with support for less powerful local inference. And the new devices based on Nvidia RTX Spark (and likely the more powerful solutions from AMD, Intel, Qualcomm with large unified memory) as a "Builder" class targeting developers and heavy local inference users. They also revealed a quantized version of their coding model designed to run on these devices. So it does seem they may be somewhat working from the bottom up building smaller models or focusing on capable local inference and balancing with more powerful frontier model access. This is a lot of marketing speak but covers much of what they revealed.

https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2026/10/07/build... https://github.com/microsoft/windowsML

This is actually the case. Windows ML (https://github.com/microsoft/windowsML) is the inference framework wtih vendor agnostic support for inference on CPU, NPU, and GPU. They also announced quite a bit more including an isolation solution with MXC. There's a lot of marketing fluff in the below link but it covers the recent announcements. https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2026/10/07/build...

Maybe you're not familiar with Stephen Toub, the author? I'm not saying for sure he didn't use AI at all on writing this piece however he is very well known for the time and effort he puts into his technical writing. Especially the performance improvements posts he writes for every new .net release.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49711424

They did also compare to Sol and the comparisons are still favorable. However, they were most favorable comparing to Opus 5 because of the cost judging by the charts.

Newer Intel Panther Lake chips perform the same or very similarly on battery as they do when plugged in - as do Qualcomm chips. However, I don't know where they're seeing "consistently beat on performance and battery life by Intel Windows laptops". Multi-core performance can definitely beat M5 in some configurations but single core performance is still fairly far behind and battery life is comparable again depending on the exact specifications and design of the laptop. I've seen analysis showing M5 is still the perf/watt king though regardless of configurations.

I just went into the settings for the widgets, turned off the "Start" or "News" experience or whatever it is and it's never come back. Just using the toggle it offers in settings. While I was at it I went into the taskbar settings and just turned off the widgets altogether, never came back. I wonder if sometimes we just assume the worst and resort first to "hack" ways to disable some of these things and when a new update comes along from your company or whoever, it gets re-enabled. Instead of just using the built-in functionality for turning things off.

I turned it off exactly once through the settings and it's never appeared again over years of updates. How did you "turn it off"?

Yes. They actually deploy a number of small models that run on NPUs on copilot PCs that only run locally.

Panther Lake isn't appearing in any products until 2026.

I am excited about Panther Lake myself but where are you reading that it has higher performance/watt than M5? The chips aren't even out yet. All we have are Intel marketing materials with vague lines on charts. No one could have possibly done a performance/watt test on Panther Lake yet. I'm hoping they beat M5 but if I had to, I'd put my money on M5.

Copilot in VSCode supports local models through Ollama as well. Not sure about Copilot in Visual Studio. That's one of the most annoying things is VS is always behind VSCode in terms of Copilot features.

As of today (and going forward), there are two different flavors of Blazor server-side rendering. There is the original version where the component is rendered on the server and interactivity is provided via websockets. Now there is also static server-side rendering, which works very similarly to razor pages, pages/components are rendered on the server and there is no interactivity. You can then, of course, add interactivity wherever you'd need it with server-interactive or webassembly interactive sub-components.

I wouldn't necessarily say there's any benefit of Blazor over HTMX, it just depends on what you're most comfortable with and what works for you in your project. But you could architect your front-end in a similar way where you have small blazor components in your pages with interactivity.

I think Blazor is in a nice state now, where I can iterate very quickly on projects with just static server side rendering and add interactivity whenever it's needed. It gives me a very fast website, rendered on the server, and the option to add some interactivity whenever I need.