Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s M1 silicon is all about platform control

androidauthority.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 364 posts

Re: Apple’s M1 silicon is all about platform control

#41

Post by akmarinov »

Multicomp wrote: post #16

> At some point in the not too distant future, old x86 applications will cease to run on Macs, as emulation support won’t run forever One thing I can credit Android some, and Windows a lot (even 10 with all its manifold privacy and user-hostility problems) with is that they are backwards compatible. exceptions to every rule, etc., but I can run all old versions of Android apps on an Android 11 phone, same for Windows…

True, that's a good thing, but that's also where you get a lot of the cruft that slows things down.

For example Apple no longer has to support OpenGL and it can just cut out relevant hardware on the SoC level, leaving more room for other things.

On the smartphone front, Qualcomm can't do that, since it sells its chips to a broad base that have variable requirements.

I guess it's a tradeoff.

Re: Apple’s M1 silicon is all about platform control

#42

Post by Bud »

_ph_ wrote: post #33
Bud wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that even a serious criticism? Users had about ten years of warning before 32-bit went away. The real impact of that on real users is minimal.

Yes, there were warnings, but what can I as a user do about it? I am impacted by 32 bit going away and I cannot do anything about it. That is why I am running Mojava instead of Catalina. On the bright side, whenever I am going to buy a new Mac, the ARM processor effectively doesn't cause any additional troubles on the compatibility side, and that was probably the reason for Apple to kill 32 bit with Catalina.

But there is something you can do about it. You're already doing it. You can run Mojave.

You want the platform to be weighed down with cruft forever because of a 0.01% use case? Do you want 8-bit support in there too, for the 68000?

Re: Apple’s M1 silicon is all about platform control

#43

Post by terramex »

formerly_proven wrote: post #12

In one of the older threads someone asked whether you'd eventually be able to run Linux on this, and someone responded that this would be annoying to do, since there aren't any docs. Is that actually true? The Apple A SoCs don't boot random kernels, so I would think the Apple M SoC does not, either, and requires bootloader/kernel to be signed by Apple, just like iPhone firmware.

Bootloader/kernel signing can be turned off, there is even GUI for that if you turn off SIP first. Is it just like a jailbroken iPhone/iPad, but straight from Apple and without losing warranty.

Re: Apple’s M1 silicon is all about platform control

#44

Post by sneak »

coldtea wrote: post #40

> Don’t be duped by performance, Apple’s M1 silicon is all about platform control Yes. That's the biggest benefit, and another reason I'm buying it (on top of great performance for my NLE apps). I want the Mac to be it's own platform, and be under Apple's control and vision. If it's also made foul-proof and air-tight, so much the better. I don't want another lowest common denominator OS converging on the same point.…

The problems with this are more societal ones than technical or practical: It is impossible, for example, to install most popular apps for macOS without identifying yourself to Apple (and by extension the US government and military intelligence). You can't use the App Store (even for free apps) without an Apple ID, and you can't get an Apple ID without a phone number. (In many countries, you can't get a phone number without a government ID.)

Similarly, if you wish to publish apps widely, you can do so with unsigned ones, but users won't ever figure out how to run those.[1] If you want your app to be widely used, you must ID yourself to Apple, who can deny/censor at will (or under state (or Hollywood) compulsion).

It builds a world in which it is impossible to easily build or distribute tools that the state really doesn't want distributed or used, because Apple is too large to deny them their demands.

I think the phrase used is "turnkey tyranny".

Anonymous publishing is essential to the preservation of a free society.

Imagine if there were one company who could remotely disable printing presses, or televisions/radios.

For those of you who aren't yet worried about this possibility of state compulsion, I ask you this: Dubya is to Trump as Trump is to x? It's not a matter of if these remote censorship tools built by Apple will be used to abuse human rights en masse, but instead a matter of when. Apple is already compromising their crypto due to requests (not compulsion) from the federal police—today.

[1]: https://lapcatsoftware.com/articles/unsigned.html

Re: Apple’s M1 silicon is all about platform control

#45

Post by sradman »

It is not ALL about platform control. ARM’s big.LITTLE architecture gives us full day battery browsing/video-playback using the efficient IceStorm cores as well as very competitive performance benchmark results using the FireStorm cores.

Apple's System-on-a-Chip provides additional value-add (e.g. unified memory). Vertical integration of silicon does expand Apple’s walled garden but I’m not convinced this is the driving force.

Re: Apple’s M1 silicon is all about platform control

#46

Post by pentae »

zuhsetaqi wrote: post #10
pentae wrote: post #7

It was a masterclass in duping really. Step 1. Design the enclosure/thermals for a much lower TDP ARM chip, causing the Intel chips to thermal throttle and run hot as possible burning your lap and roasting your palms for years Step 2. Introduce the new powerful ARM chip which now runs much cooler and faster in the same enclosure Step 3. Profit! Worked on me, I just ordered mine

As if. Intel clearly failed to deliver what they claimed. That’s the reason why we had to deal with such overheating issues not only with MacBooks

I don't think it was Intels fault that they decided not to run a heat pipe to the fan on the previous gen MBA

Re: Apple’s M1 silicon is all about platform control

#47

Post by akmarinov »

Tepix wrote: post #3

It will be interesting to see how long Rosetta-2 will be supported. macOS 10.15 took away 32bit apps, which was a sizeable chunk so clearly Apple is willing to alienate some of its users in the name of progress and slimlining.

At WWDC they said they're starting a transition period that'll last 2 years.

So I expect them to drop support in 1.5 years

Re: Apple’s M1 silicon is all about platform control

#48

Post by a_imho »

Veen wrote: post #34
newbie578 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet there were people like you back when slavery was legal. If you don't like slavery, just don't buy slaves. Nothing wrong with that, right? YoU hAvE oPtIonS aS a CoNsuMer.

It is in extremely bad taste—not to mention ludicrously inaccurate—to compare your premium laptop ecosystem options with chattel slavery.

Aren't Apple devices assembled in sweatshops? The comparison might be more accurate than intended.

Re: Apple’s M1 silicon is all about platform control

#49

Post by klelatti »

> What Cupertino really wants more control. First over the development roadmap and inner working of its silicon. With in-house processors, Apple can drive integrated imaging, machine learning, and security features in the direction it wants.

This is the real point about control - not about forcing anyone to use the App store which may or may not happen but could have happened with Intel CPUs too - and its about building more capable machines. The speed is in part as a result of that control.

And I don't think anyone is being duped.

Re: Apple’s M1 silicon is all about platform control

#50

Post by Bud »

terramex wrote: post #38
Bud wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that even a serious criticism? Users had about ten years of warning before 32-bit went away. The real impact of that on real users is minimal.

> Users had about ten years of warning before 32-bit went away. Citation needed. I remember 32 bit being deprecated just 12 months before its support removal and there were no signs earlier. I just had to recompile my apps to x64, but some 3rd party tools I use never got an update and my 2013 Macbook will stay on Mojave forever.

64-bit apps debuted something like 12 years ago on the Mac. The writing has thus been on the wall for circa a decade, as I said. You figured 32-bit would be supported for what, 20 years? 30?
Post reply on HN