Apple’s M1 silicon is all about platform control • Hacker News Board

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

#281

Post by klelatti » Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 4:31 PM UTC

barnacled wrote: post #258

This is obviously about control. Apple's MO with every _smaller_ supplier has been: 1. Set up office down the road 2. Poach top engineers 3. Come up with some excuse to cancel use of supplier and integrate in house. The media and fanboys are remarkably complicit, coming up with excuses for apple's behaviour and giving very favourable coverage. In this case, intel are too big for this trick to work and apple already h…

That's very sad to hear. Could you explain how close Apple's GPU is to Imagination's and why Imagination wasn't able to protect their IP?

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

#282

Post by Tade0 » Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 4:38 PM UTC

bfgoodrich wrote: post #257

Tade0 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 2080 Max-Q in my laptop is fairly underpowered (even for a mobile GPU) and yet it achieves ~3x the performance of the GTX 1050 Ti. Also its TDP is 90W - not exactly power sipping, but also not 300W. The M1's GPU may be efficient (thanks mostly to TSMC's 5nm process it's built in), but in terms of raw power it's just not there.

"The 2080 Max-Q in my laptop is fairly underpowered" The 2080 Max-Q only exists in ~$3000 gaming laptops. Poor battery life, 4lb+ laptops. There is no universe where that is "fairly underpowered" unless we've moved the goal posts to pretend that everyone is rolling with a GTX 3080 and anything less is unbearable. In the real world you have to go to the seriously compromised "gaming" tier to get better graphics perfor…

The 2080 Max-Q only exists in ~$3000 gaming laptops. Poor battery life, 4lb+ laptops.

I have an ASUS Zephyrus G14.

1680g(3.7lb) as checked just a minute ago using a kitchen scale. I don't know about battery life because I capped the charging at 80% and it still lasts a whole day of normal usage if need be. MSRP ~$1,500 in the US.

I don't think it's remotely so simple.

If you compare it to the Ryzen 4xxx mobile CPUs it checks out - performance increase is roughly as expected given the difference in feature size.

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

#283

Post by sneak » Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 4:39 PM UTC

socialdemocrat wrote: post #68

The truth is somewhere in the middle, so while this article has some good points it is too colored by a strong dislike for all things Apple and borderline conspiratorial thinking. I don’t think there is anything that suggests Apple is going to stop people from installing Apps outside their App Store. Rather it is about making sure it is easy for regular users to get Apps in a safe manner without malware and Trojan ho…

> I don’t think there is anything that suggests Apple is going to stop people from installing Apps outside their App Store.

It is already exceptionally difficult to distribute apps produced outside of their developer program.

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

#284

Post by pvg » Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 4:39 PM UTC

satyrnein wrote: post #279

pvg wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are some relevant, analogous examples from this history?

Not exactly the same, but it reminded me of how they never made FaceTime an open standard after stating they would.

This is not so much a flip but probably the closest thing to a meaningful 'reversal' compared to the other ones in thread so far. Like, they never said they will never have an App store, styluses are still specialized rather than standard input devices, etc. Obviously, companies both change direction and fail to meet various expectations all the time but 'history of flipping the script' seems pretty tenuous to me, so far.

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

#285

Post by sneak » Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 4:41 PM UTC

moepstar wrote: post #162

gameswithgo wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I don’t think there is anything that suggests Apple is going to stop people from installing Apps outside their App Store Of course there are things that suggest this, such as, that is how iphones and ipads work, and its become increasingly difficult over time to do it on a mac.

As in what, having to RMB -> Open ? In what way was it made "more difficult" than that? What exactly suggests it is "becoming (even?) more difficult"?

https://lapcatsoftware.com/articles/unsigned.html

The first time you "RMB -> Open", as you put it, it won't allow you to open the app at all. You have to do it twice, only the second time does the button to actually open the app appear.

Both times the dialog boxes mention "malware". Both times the default button is "move to trash".

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

#286

Post by sneak » Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 4:43 PM UTC

evgen wrote: post #220

0goel0 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We know for a fact that this is a much smaller problem on iOS than Android. I am happy that Android exists as a choice for users but let us not pretend there are no trade offs. Android is not a choice for iOS users, it's not a seamless switch. The solution as I see it is that apple could still very well protect users from "trojans" but have an opt-in for 3p app installation. A button that says "I want to install ap…

The problem with this 'I know the risks' approach is that it is often put out there by people who do know the risks but these people are massively outnumbered by the huge mass of people who have no idea about the risks but will gladly install from Bob's FlyByNight App Emporium if it means they will get a "can't lose" video poker app or a chance to win a free Fortnite skin and please be sure to click OK to all of thos…

I think the answer to this is painfully clear: because no one makes hardware anywhere near close to the quality of mac and iphone hardware in those verticals.

We'd like to use the best available software, running on the best available hardware.

Criticizing Apple's software censorship choices is thus the natural logical target. Otherwise, we have to use things like the PinePhone for the next 10-15 years until someone makes something comparable to an iPhone 6 that can run whatever software the owner wants.

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

#287

Post by valuearb » Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 4:46 PM UTC

dreamcompiler wrote: post #280

valuearb wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is the developer of thunderbolt,They wrote the specifications for it and there are two thunderbolt ports on every M1 Mac

Intel invented Thunderbolt as LightPeak. Apple developed it further in cooperation with Intel.

You are right. I forgot about LightPeak, which was designed to work over optical cables.

Apple came in when Intel decided to build a version for standardized cables, and helped Intel develop the spec (and even supplied the name).

But my point remains. Apple knows Thunderbolt as well as Intel does by this time.

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

#288

Post by Tainnor » Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 4:47 PM UTC

rootusrootus wrote: post #229

Hamuko wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google allows third-party app stores and most of the source code for Android is out there in the open. I don't know how Google "practically owns" your device considering Apple asserts a much more complete control over your device.

> most of the source code for Android Except for everything related to the Play Store, correct? And that is a critical part of Android at this point. Google is progressively closing Android.

You're unfortunately right that Google is closing down Android. I dislike Apple with a passion, but the noose over hear in Android-land is getting tighter too.

One example is how in newer phones it will be impossible for apps to bypass root detection. I don't know why it should be anyone's business whether I want to run my banking app on a rooted phone or not, but this is the state of modern technology unfortunately...

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

#289

Post by sneak » Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 4:48 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #157

sneak wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you can't trust the government, if the government wants increasingly more data, the government should be curbed by protests, voting, and so on. The apps not talking to the vendor is just a band-aid. And what if you can't discuss protests or protest organization on any of the apps you are allowed to install on your device, as Apple has made the case already in Hong Kong? This all starts with the tools. Without to…

> And what if you can't discuss protests or protest organization on any of the apps you are allowed to install on your device, as Apple has made the case already in Hong Kong? What about it? People had protests, and far more massive, at the era of Louis XVI or the Czar, or Pinochet, or whatever. Without IM apps and 10000 electronic alternatives, and with much worse repurcursions if caught... > In Apple's jurisdiction…

Wars are fought now primarily with information, not violence. I would like to keep it that way; extremely effective systems of state censorship of publishing and communications, such as implemented presently on iOS (remember when the US was about to ban TikTok?) is a good way to force large groups to revert to those bad, old ways if all other options are removed.

I don't want the majority of the population to only have immediate access to devices that are similarly censored, centrally controlled, and able to be remotely surveilled (such as the unencrypted OCSP data leak extant in macOS the last two+ years, and all of the telemetry built into Windows by design).

Privacy and freedom and peace are all deeply interlinked. It's an ecosystem, and damaging one part can have deep consequences for the others.

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

#290

Post by jtbayly » Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 4:53 PM UTC

intpx wrote: post #129

Doctor_Fegg wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some non-trivial apps used by real users that are 32-bit only, in particular the pre-subscription versions of Adobe Creative Suite.

So end-of-life releases that have been replaced with newer builds? Any application that doesn't survive the progression of technology doesn't deserve to-- software requires maintenance. We expect hardware to get bigger/faster/stronger but are unwilling to hold software to the same standard? I am wracking my brain but cannot think of a single application that I ran on previous epochs of hardware (whether it be 32bit,…

Software that runs perfectly fine, performs just what I need, and that I already paid for, that has no security implications... and you want me to now start paying monthly for the privilege of using the same software. No thanks.

I know software requires maintenance. When it’s cheaper to buy another computer that runs the old software just fine than paying for “updates” and “improvements” and “bug fixes” that do nothing for me, I think people are going to stop paying for such “updates”.