That sounds really interesting — what makes RISC-V better than ARM for this?
Partly the design of the core, partly the open source nature. Speaking from experience, it's really hard to push the envelope with ARM chips as they refuse to license them for FPGA deployments so there's not a lot of work being done there.
What stops anyone from implementing ARM ISA on FPGA? If you think of an ISA like an API - that's something that is not copyrightable, so in theory anyone could do ARM on FPGA.
So I am guessing that nobody wants to bear the cost of such development and also risking potential lawsuit?
It's slightly more nuanced than that - you can of course just block it from doing so, and there's certainly an argument for it being updated to not need a network call each time, but phrasing it like this makes it sound worse than it actually is. I'll just quote Jeff Johnson, who's looked into this and written about it - his comment[1] on this is post is quite useful: https://eclecticlight.co/2020/11/25/macos-has-che…
You added detail, yet didn't refute the statement. That it isn't easy to simply and specifically turn off is not acceptable.
No, I'm fairly certain I refuted it.
The parent comment is incorrectly stating that each request to Apple is checking a binary, and it's not. This has been well documented both here on HN and across the web.
You mean the business practices wherein Apple is 10x better on privacy than everyone else to the point that Facebook and Google are now being forced to be honest with users, disclose all the user data they are stealing and selling, and disclose all the privacy and security risks inherent in their business models? Sign me up for more of those kinds of "business practices", thank you very much.
Apple is reportedly beefing up their mobile ads business. Hard to say privacy is the reason when Apple immediately attempts to benefit directly financially and likely with some privacy hits.
The last I read Apple plans to add or expand one more ad slot on the App Store. Is there a bigger ads initiative?
Give Mac software a few years to "catch up" and everything will feel just as slow as usual (and I'm not even joking, so far, software was always excellent at undoing any advancements in hardware very quickly).
I feel like things have felt pretty good in the PC world since NVMe SSDs and approximately Sandy Bridge. But, I do agree that there is a lot of jank in software that we write these days. Over the weekend I started writing an application that uses glfx + dear imgui, running on a 360Hz monitor. The lack of latency was incredible. I think it's something that people don't even know is possible, so they don't even attempt…
> I feel like things have felt pretty good in the PC world since NVMe SSDs and approximately Sandy Bridge.
Agree, and I would add that devs on some platforms have not been as thorough about using (or abusing?) all that new power. I've been able to continue use a Sandy Bridge laptop from 2011 - it'll turn 10 years old in a couple of months - because most apps on Linux still have so little complexity that you could run them on a computer from 2006. Electron-based stuff is not the norm. Adding an SSD a few years ago has been my only significant hardware upgrade.
Meanwhile, Macbook Pros that came out two years after my laptop was built can't even be updated to the latest version of macOS, before you even get to the issue of software jank.
I really want the next MacBook Pro to support driving two 4K monitors over thunderbolt and have an option to buy 32 gigs of ram.
I would prefer just one 6K or 8K monitor personally at a size of say 55" with a wide ratio. Simpler setup. No post in the middle. Something like this but bigger with higher resolution, and maybe a bit more height vertically (this one is a bit too wide for its height in my opinion): https://www.samsung.com/ca/monitors/gaming/super-ultra-wide-... I think that dual 4K is the old way, single 6K/8K ultra wides are the fut…
I'd prefer two distinct monitors. I use one more expensive colour-calibrated one, and then a standard one for work where colour isn't as critical. A large colour-calibrated screen would be prohibitively expensive.
I really want the next MacBook Pro to support driving two 4K monitors over thunderbolt and have an option to buy 32 gigs of ram.
My current MBP drives 3 4K monitors and has 64 gigs of ram. Perhaps I’m not clear on the point you’re trying to make.
They're talking about M1 or better. My M1 13" MBP with 8GB RAM is far superior to my 2015 MBP (with more RAM) when it comes to video editing, etc. First in my wishlist would be re-adding two external displays, then more RAM.
> Just imagine Apple releasing the Mx chips for server infrastructure. Intel ought to be sweating bullets now. As a developer, I'm sweating bullets. Imagine a future where Apple is the only serious platform left on mobile, server and desktop, then developers can forget about starting that next disruptive startup and instead they will become just second-class Apple "employees" with contracts similar to Uber drivers.
Apple isn't harnessing magic here. The opportunity for competition exists, but everyone else is just sitting on their asses while Apple's chip team puts in the work. If you want to beat Mx, you have to think outside the box, just like how Apple thought outside of x86. That being said, I do enjoy the shift to ARM as the dominant arch. x86 has far too many decades of cruft behind it. I don't think Apple will take over…
In 2009, the price to have a chip prototype was about $1M/year in software licenses and $50K-$100K per fab evaluation with half an year delay.
That was 12 years ago. I guess software licenses go up and I am certain that current processes have chip prototypes to cost $500K-$1.5M per evaluation.
Yes, you can say everyone sit on their hands and/or asses.
I say that having money in bank for several dozens of thousands of chip prototypes certainly helps Apple in the design.
Apple isn't harnessing magic here. The opportunity for competition exists, but everyone else is just sitting on their asses while Apple's chip team puts in the work. If you want to beat Mx, you have to think outside the box, just like how Apple thought outside of x86. That being said, I do enjoy the shift to ARM as the dominant arch. x86 has far too many decades of cruft behind it. I don't think Apple will take over…
"The opportunity for competition exists" is the most true statement and response to everyone grumbling about Apple dominance. Somewhere, somehow, the ecosystem of competitors has failed to execute, got lazy, etc and now is looking to regulators to bail them out. It makes me a bit sick. Apple is nothing more than a computing stack wrapped in a portfolio of consumer products. They happen to see this future early, inves…
It exists, but not everywhere... I think Kirin was close to being on par for a while, it might even have been dangerous? With regards to privacy ? Plus there must have been some serious PLA money involved... anyway now this ARM cpu cannot be fabbed by TMSC because of the sanctions.
Somewhere, the collective whos who of the silicon chip world is shitting their pants. Apple just showed to the world how powerful and efficient processors can be. All that with good design. Customers are going to demand more from Intel and the likes. Just imagine Apple releasing the Mx chips for server infrastructure. Intel ought to be sweating bullets now. edit: a word.
> Just imagine Apple releasing the Mx chips for server infrastructure. Intel ought to be sweating bullets now. As a developer, I'm sweating bullets. Imagine a future where Apple is the only serious platform left on mobile, server and desktop, then developers can forget about starting that next disruptive startup and instead they will become just second-class Apple "employees" with contracts similar to Uber drivers.
There's no doubt Apple has a lead in consumer grade chips for the moment, but I expect Apple's lead here will last for 2 or 3 years tops before intel, amd, or perhaps other arm chip oems catch up. Apple doesn't have access to special unique wonderful secrets, arcane wisdom that only the elect can learn. Relax, Apple is not going to take over the world, as we speak their competitors are working like mad to close the gap.
I really want the next MacBook Pro to support driving two 4K monitors over thunderbolt and have an option to buy 32 gigs of ram.
Compared to M1? Because my Intel MBP has done that for years. I now use an M1 mac mini with two 4k monitors (not from one cable though)
I have a 2018 Mac Mini driving two 4K displays with Display Port over USB-C cables. I previously was driving 2 x 24" 2K displays (same cables) and had no performance problems. Once I upgraded to the 4K displays I've observed very noticeable display draw performance issues. It's not enough for me to give up the 4K displays but I'm wondering if this is improved on the current M1 Mac mini?