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

331–340 of 364 posts

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

#331

Post by pjmlp »

danaris wrote: post #186
eganist wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because MS can't let anything go. To be clear, this isn't really up to them. It's what market forces have dictated. Tons of old corp apps exist all over the place that necessitate this level of backwards compatibility.

It's totally up to them. If Microsoft wanted to, they could say tomorrow that Windows 11 will no longer maintain backwards compatibility with X, Y, and Z ancient technologies. This would anger some of their corporate customers. Possibly even enough that they could get together and fund some kind of Windows Legacy effort. But realistically, if Microsoft decided to stop being backwards-compatible, where are their custo…

They tried that with WinRT, and despite many of us actually liking those efforts, it failed as those customers did not accepted it, now there is Project Reunion to unroll the path taken since Windows 8 introduction.

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

#332

Post by sliken »

sneak wrote: post #285
moepstar wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

Gah, that really rankles me. Is it too much to ask to have an obvious keystore that allows the user to decide what signatures to trust? Ideally self-compiled binaries could be self-signed and still protect from attacker supplied binaries.

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

#333

Post by floatingatoll »

nayuki wrote: post #318
floatingatoll wrote: post #305

This article leaves two billion-dollar market opportunities on the table: Online testing and multiplayer gaming^. Apple’s recent announcement of a web authentication API includes if your system is booted in fully secure mode^ an attestation that the OS is in secure mode, crypto-signed by the secure kernel whose own signature is by Apple. This provides something that no desktop/laptop today can provide: certainty that…

What about this scenario?: A gamer wishes to cheat. They run the game on an unmodified, tamperproof, attested computer as per your description. Then they attach the HDMI output to a video capture card on a secondary computer, run some artificial intelligence software, and send back automated commands using a USB mouse and keyboard. Given that this kind of attack/circumvention is possible, are you sure that an attesta…

Yes, because unlike today, that’s not a software-exclusive attack that can be sold online without shipping a physical product.

(Games can also trivially enable HDCP to defend against that sort of attack in the majority of cases where it’s even possible to construct it at all, setting aside the chances of successfully asking a neural net to decode a game’s video signal and cheat effectively — and since the entire stack is attested secure, cheaters can’t use hacked video drivers that spoof HDCP, either.)

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

#334

Post by floatingatoll »

floatingatoll wrote: post #305

This article leaves two billion-dollar market opportunities on the table: Online testing and multiplayer gaming^. Apple’s recent announcement of a web authentication API includes if your system is booted in fully secure mode^ an attestation that the OS is in secure mode, crypto-signed by the secure kernel whose own signature is by Apple. This provides something that no desktop/laptop today can provide: certainty that…

See also today’s parallel discussion about Microsoft Pluton providing remote attestation in exactly this manner for Azure cloud servers and, eventually, all consumer x86_64 CPUs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25192681

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

#335

Post by AnthonyMouse »

kilburn wrote: post #317
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Additionally, completely dismissing the M1 as a 'marginal improvement' shows a level of anti-Apple that is clearly clouding the authors judgement. Is there somewhere I can find some evidence that it isn't a marginal improvement? Apple timed the release perfectly to create the impression that it was more, because its obvious competition will be Zen 3 laptops, which are right around the corner but not actually out ye…

> Is there somewhere I can find some evidence that it isn't a marginal improvement? While your story about raw computing performance holds, there are two reasons why apple's M1 release is significant (i.e.: not marginal): 1. This is the first time in decades that we see a serious non-x86 competitor for general purpose consumer-level computing. This is significant in and of itself. 2. Power consumption. These things s…

> This is the first time in decades that we see a serious non-x86 competitor for general purpose consumer-level computing. This is significant in and of itself.

I feel like this would be a lot more significant if you could buy the chip on its own. When you can only buy it as part of a Mac, you're really not buying the chip, you're buying a Mac with all that entails. Then who makes the chip in your Mac doesn't really change much because you buy it from Apple either way.

> Power consumption. These things seem to consume 2/3rds as many watts to offer the same performance levels than their x86 counterparts. This is big in the laptop space.

But that's much the same issue where you're comparing it to Zen 2 when Zen 3 is expected to be 20% faster at the same power, and close a lot of that gap.

It's also hard to compare this in general, for two reasons. The first is that the M1 is 5nm, so then the question is how much of the efficiency is due to that (and will accrue to AMD next year) and how much, if any, is the design?

And the second is that the M1 is big.LITTLE. The small cores are more power efficient, so when you average them in, the overall result should be more power efficient than entirely big cores. But x86-64 processors with a similar configuration are sparse, so what do you compare to? It will be interesting to see the result when there are some (both Intel and AMD have some planned).

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

#336

Post by AnthonyMouse »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #313
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Additionally, completely dismissing the M1 as a 'marginal improvement' shows a level of anti-Apple that is clearly clouding the authors judgement. Is there somewhere I can find some evidence that it isn't a marginal improvement? Apple timed the release perfectly to create the impression that it was more, because its obvious competition will be Zen 3 laptops, which are right around the corner but not actually out ye…

It's not marginal at all at the same price point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxSI45eeAts Not to mention the ergonomic factor of being cooler and quieter.

> It's not marginal at all at the same price point

This review appears to be comparing a dual core Intel i3 to the 4+4 core M1, which are only the same price because Apple doesn't sell any laptops for less than $999 even when they're a dual core Intel i3.

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

#337

Post by Tade0 »

bfgoodrich wrote: post #292
Tade0 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 i…

A disclaimer on your battery life: that is doing literally nothing with the 2080. Effectively turning it off and carrying it around as an extra cost/weight for nothing. Because the moment you use that 2080, your battery life will be South of 3 hours with a 100% charge and a factory new battery. You'll also have a jet engine fan and a leg burning device. Which is the point.

I have a whole day on battery for normal usage, and competent gaming performance when I plug it in.

The M1 offers only one of these things.

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

#338

Post by fomine3 »

my123 wrote: post #105
vvwvvwvvw wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was wondering why Gamer Nexus (a very rigorous YouTube review channel) didn't sent a M1 device, while those Apple fanboy channels got it. Probably the dude would've torn the M1 performance claims apart.

Because those outlets never get Macs usually, and it isn't what they cover. Note that a laptop chip also isn't a gaming product, for obvious reasons.

Thankfully AnandTech received Mac mini unit from Apple, Thanks Anand now at Apple?

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

#339

Post by fomine3 »

bfgoodrich wrote: post #156
Tade0 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the GPU there is okay-ish, but not amazing - not really suitable for gaming.

The power-sipping, integrated GPU has performance 30% better than a GTX 1050 Ti [1]. The GTX 1050 Ti is still a current, sold product [2], selling for $150 or so USD [3], and consumes about 75-100W in your PC. We can no true Scotsman this, but that GPU performance is a literal magnitude+ greater than what the majority of users have in their computers (and I am including full desktops in this discussion). The overwhel…

GPU perf/watt is mainly depends on manufacturing process so comparing it to 1050Ti is just for indicating its performance, not for comparing to others. M1's CPU is really impressive but I don't think GPU is impressive but well done for mobile use.

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

#340

Post by mixmastamyk »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #336
mixmastamyk wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not marginal at all at the same price point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxSI45eeAts Not to mention the ergonomic factor of being cooler and quieter.

> It's not marginal at all at the same price point This review appears to be comparing a dual core Intel i3 to the 4+4 core M1, which are only the same price because Apple doesn't sell any laptops for less than $999 even when they're a dual core Intel i3.

The i5 model costs more than the M1 and still doesn't perform as well. So that the i3 should be cheaper is somewhat moot.
Post reply on HN