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

What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

512pixels.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 263 posts

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#41

Post by cwp »

akamaka wrote: post #5

How will Apple recoup the cost of designing a powerful chip for a product like the Mac Pro, which is presumably their lowest-selling product? Most of the M-series chips are shared across multiple products, but the Mac Pro seems to be a clear case where using a powerful off-the-shelf Intel chip makes more business sense right now. I don’t see Apple doing it simply as a vanity project, so there will have to be some inn…

It may be that an Apple Silicon Mac Pro isn't profitable, but it's still good business sense to produce it. It gives them a way to push the cutting edge in a way that none of their other products do, and the things they invent for it may filter down the product line. At the same time, the sort of professionals that buy Mac Pros are good customers to have, even if there aren't many of them. Ignoring them has hurt Apple in the past. At the end of the day, Apple can afford to lose a bit of money on a small volume product for a few generations while they work out the kinks.

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#42

Post by dagmx »

rosywoozlechan wrote: post #38
dagmx wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Metal is a feature of the OS not the hardware. Every Mac supports metal today. Some caveats: * maybe not true if you go back to the introduction of metal but idk * metal feature support varies by hardware

It's true that currently Metal is available across different GPUs, but the feature set available is dictated by the hardware: https://developer.apple.com/metal/Metal-Feature-Set-Tables.p...

Edit: the user above changed the content of their post materially twice , with wildly different content each time.

I’m not sure how to respond as a result since it’s hard to discuss in good faith.

V1 of their comment simply asked what “metal” evokes in one’s mind.

V2 then posted a link to the Metal page saying it lets you directly use your GPU hardware.

V3 is now pointing out that metal feature support varies by hardware which I already called out, but they’re positing as a contradiction somehow.

As such I’ve removed my reply because it makes no sense based on their frequent changes and left this one instead.

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#44

Post by bpye »

eptcyka wrote: post #14
bpye wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How will Apple recoup the cost of designing a powerful chip for a product like the Mac Pro, which is presumably their lowest-selling product? In their own datacentres?

I am under the impression they do not run macOS in their own datacenters. And, unlike mortals, if they need to run macOS in datacenters, they're not bound by their own license to never virtualize macOS on non-macOS hosts, they can do as they please.

In addition to the other reply - Apple definitely _do_ run macOS in a datacentre for Xcode Cloud [0].

0 - https://twitter.com/khaost/status/1410332951963869185

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#45

Post by kalleboo »

chongli wrote: post #26
ksec wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How will Apple recoup the cost of designing a powerful chip for a product like the Mac Pro, which is presumably their lowest-selling product? Which is the question I have been asking since 2015 . From a cost prospective it never made any sense. Presumably they will wait until Mac Studio becoming powerful enough to fill the gap. >but the Mac Pro seems to be a clear case where using a powerful off-the-shelf Intel chip…

Which is the question I have been asking since 2015. From a cost prospective it never made any sense. Presumably they will wait until Mac Studio becoming powerful enough to fill the gap. To me the only reason they still make products like the Mac Pro is for brand reputation and face-saving. It’s like when a big auto maker sponsors a formula 1 racing team. There’s no profit in formula 1 (for the auto makers). It’s jus…

Right, as a brand reputation item, if you're building an ecosystem you need to have a clear upgrade path for all your users.

If I'm starting out today and looking to choose a PC or Mac ecosystem, if I see that the Mac has an upper bound that's lower than the PC, then in my starry-eyed optimism as a newbie I'll think I might as well start as the PC since one day when I'm super successful and I need more power I'm going to have to change platforms anyway.

Even if none of those users will ever end up using any more power than the Mac Studio, if they're convinced they will then they will not choose your ecosystem.

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#46

Post by noduerme »

eastbound wrote: post #16
dwaite wrote: post #10

IMHO Mac mini isn't going to die any time soon; it is there in the lineup to be hostable/rackable operations glue for running old software and (old operating systems) headless. I doubt they will release a M2 Pro Mini. They will instead update the Mac Studio. Conversely, if they make a M2 Pro in the current Mini form factor, they'll likely use that as an excuse to redesign the regular M2 Mini to be smaller (Mac Micro)…

I buy Mac Mini because OSHA once demanded (and I find it’s not a bad idea) that I use screens instead of laptops to avoid employees spending 7hrs bending to neck. So they have 2 displays at work and 2 displays at home, and a Mac Mini, total 2300€, better than a 2800€ Macbook Pro + screens. What is the state of the art, do all of you simply buy a top-notch Macbook Pro and work on it all day?

Can't say I'm state of the art, but I pretty much work on an M1 Max MBP all day, and I'm completely happy with it as a dev + art/design machine. Plus a tablet screen for drawing and sculpting.

It's the best machine I've ever had. But then again I've only owned laptops since 1998. Still keep my 2014 Macbook Air on the desk just as a conferencing / music box.

[edit] I also only work from my home office when I have to... the rest of the time I'll be working on the porch, at the kitchen table, out at a cafe, etc.

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#47

Post by IshKebab »

akamaka wrote: post #5

How will Apple recoup the cost of designing a powerful chip for a product like the Mac Pro, which is presumably their lowest-selling product? Most of the M-series chips are shared across multiple products, but the Mac Pro seems to be a clear case where using a powerful off-the-shelf Intel chip makes more business sense right now. I don’t see Apple doing it simply as a vanity project, so there will have to be some inn…

Presumably it isn't that low volume. Just low volume compared to their other products.

They can probably heavily base a more powerful chip on their existing designs but with more cores & cache, so design should be relatively cheap. Manufacturing the masks etc. is probably around $10m which is probably fine given how expensive Mac Pros are (and it would simplify their software if they can ditch Intel entirely).

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#48

Post by rosywoozlechan »

dagmx wrote: post #42
rosywoozlechan wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's true that currently Metal is available across different GPUs, but the feature set available is dictated by the hardware: https://developer.apple.com/metal/Metal-Feature-Set-Tables.p...

Edit: the user above changed the content of their post materially twice , with wildly different content each time. I’m not sure how to respond as a result since it’s hard to discuss in good faith. V1 of their comment simply asked what “metal” evokes in one’s mind. V2 then posted a link to the Metal page saying it lets you directly use your GPU hardware. V3 is now pointing out that metal feature support varies by hard…

I corrected my comment as I realized I was mistaken? I didn't see that I had a reply, and I wasn't able to delete my comment. You must have replied instantly because this all happened within a couple of minutes of me originally writing the comment. I frequently update comments like this.

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#49

Post by klelatti »

Just looking at the economics of the Mac Pro based on sales of the machine itself doesn't quite capture the full picture. An Apple Silicon Mac Pro could have many roles:

- A flagship product that demonstrates just how powerful Apple Silicon can be. This in turn could enhance the Apple / Mac brand for a certain group of users.

- An aspirational product for users who think that they might need more power in the future.

- A means of keeping companies that need a small number of powerful machines in the Apple camp.

- A proving ground for technology that ultimately makes its way into volume products.

All of these factors could make the product justify its development costs even if actual sales are small. I doubt that the highest end models of some premium car brands recoup their development costs but their value to the brand offsets those costs.

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#50

Post by dagmx »

rosywoozlechan wrote: post #48
dagmx wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit: the user above changed the content of their post materially twice , with wildly different content each time. I’m not sure how to respond as a result since it’s hard to discuss in good faith. V1 of their comment simply asked what “metal” evokes in one’s mind. V2 then posted a link to the Metal page saying it lets you directly use your GPU hardware. V3 is now pointing out that metal feature support varies by hard…

I corrected my comment as I realized I was mistaken? I didn't see that I had a reply, and I wasn't able to delete my comment. You must have replied instantly because this all happened within a couple of minutes of me originally writing the comment. I frequently update comments like this.

Fair enough. It does show a 5 minute difference between the comments, so not instant but I recognize edits happen. It’s just that each of your edits were so wildly different.

As for your latest update, I had already mentioned that in my comment as a caveat, though I hadn’t shared the link which is always great to have.

Post reply on HN