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

251–260 of 263 posts

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#251

Post by pornel »

MrBuddyCasino wrote: post #201
nine_k wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the very ability to make a 512 bit-wide memory controller stems from the very short, very tightly controlled and shielded lined between the DRAM chips and the controller? (No idea if it's so, but DRAM is such an analog HF beast that a controller needs training before it can work with a particular chip, in a particular slot on a particular system board. It's automatic but it's there, and it must have limits.)

High end graphics cards have been using 512 Bit wide memory buses for a while, so I don't think that's it.

but the GPU RAM is not expandable and seems to be a big price factor.

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#252

Post by Maxburn »

wtallis wrote: post #235
Maxburn wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People that are downvoting, what am I missing? Developers either target apple silicon and ignore intel, ignore apple silicon and rely on rosetta2 for as long as that's here, or invest in both to optimize performance and just eat all the extra work both require? I'm not a mac user, is there such a thing as making a app targeting apple silicon work on a x86 machine? If someone is looking to add their application to Mac…

Why would anything in HVAC control software be written in a way that is at all specific to a particular CPU architecture? Most software really doesn't need to use inline assembly or SIMD intrinsics, so usually the only extra effort to support both x86 and arm is in configuring the build system correctly.

I admit I don't know the software at that level but I think you would be surprised, it's a web server, db engine, and all sorts of things rolled up into it. This is commercial/industrial HVAC, it has more in common with emulating a PLC on PC hardware than say a nest thermostat app. I know it interacts with serial and ethernet ports to speak multiple languages (BACnet/LonWorks/Modbus/hundreds more) and they like to have some close relationship with the hardware, some of which is for licensing...

They currently support windows, redhat, and just added Ubuntu. Very much similar version of the software runs on their "native" jace 8000 (PLC lite) hardware, which is ARM under it all so you would think they already have experience in that area.

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#253

Post by wtallis »

Maxburn wrote: post #252
wtallis wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would anything in HVAC control software be written in a way that is at all specific to a particular CPU architecture? Most software really doesn't need to use inline assembly or SIMD intrinsics, so usually the only extra effort to support both x86 and arm is in configuring the build system correctly.

I admit I don't know the software at that level but I think you would be surprised, it's a web server, db engine, and all sorts of things rolled up into it. This is commercial/industrial HVAC, it has more in common with emulating a PLC on PC hardware than say a nest thermostat app. I know it interacts with serial and ethernet ports to speak multiple languages (BACnet/LonWorks/Modbus/hundreds more) and they like to ha…

> which is ARM under it all so you would think they already have experience in that area.

I think you are probably still incorrectly assuming that the CPU architecture and instruction set have any relevance. What you've described sounds like the kind of software that is a portability challenge due to being tied to specific operating systems and their particular APIs for interacting with peripherals. It doesn't sound like anything that should much more than a recompile to target a new CPU architecture, provided that the application has already been ported to the operating system that will be used on that architecture. Certainly nothing you've described would require hand-tuned assembly code to reach adequate performance on a decade-old laptop.

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#254

Post by UltraViolence »

philistine wrote: post #230
Damogran6 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're missing the point. Apple's decisions and methods have been criticized for longer than many HN viewers have been alive. The OP is making a claim that Apple's decisions are unwise [i]despite the fact that it's the most profitable company evar[/i] cite: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/apple-3-trillion-market-cap-fir... What chance can anyone else have if the Mac Pro is doomed if iPhone sales dip?

People have not updated their opinions with regards to facts since 2008. It might actually be new information to that person that Apple is now the most profitable company in the existence of the human race .

The reason Apple is so profitable is because of the iPhone. The Macs aren't bringing in all that much money and I'm postulating that Mac will lose a lot of market share because they ditched the x86 architecture.

Although revenue for Mac is still increasing (most likely because they're making even more profit by using their own CPU) the sales are already softening.

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#255

Post by abrawill »

formerly_proven wrote: post #243
abrawill wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just out of interest; which ones would you consider high-end?

For CAD specifically I'd say "high end" are CATIA, NX and maybe Creo? SolidWorks and SolidEdge would form the tier below that. For CAx in general it's difficult to say, because there's such a huge variety of software and every little niche has its own highly specialized (and usually very expensive) tools. I've never seen any of these support anything other than Windows and/or Linux. Some of them have Win32 GUIs and L…

Thanks for your answer! What makes it so that AutoCAD is not high end? Like what features does it lack or what workflows does it not support?

Suppose something like CATIA was available on Mac and offered lets say a performance benefit. Would you consider Mac? Or would you for example still need a whole other set of tools to be available as well for it to be even possible?

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#256

Post by skissane »

formerly_proven wrote: post #243
abrawill wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just out of interest; which ones would you consider high-end?

For CAD specifically I'd say "high end" are CATIA, NX and maybe Creo? SolidWorks and SolidEdge would form the tier below that. For CAx in general it's difficult to say, because there's such a huge variety of software and every little niche has its own highly specialized (and usually very expensive) tools. I've never seen any of these support anything other than Windows and/or Linux. Some of them have Win32 GUIs and L…

> There's also still IBM AIX systems around, as well as IBM mainframes. Not my department though.

Are you saying some people still use IBM mainframes for CAD/CAE/etc applications? If yes, that's unexpected yet intriguing information, and I'd love to know more.

Although maybe you were just stating the obvious that IBM mainframes survive in general even if no longer in this particular domain.

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#257

Post by skissane »

akelly wrote: post #96
devwastaken wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That will be really difficult to do considering apple needs macs to develop iPhone. Apple dogfoods it's own hardware, that's why it's the best.

Apple doesn't want you to know this but they do their mechanical and electrical design on Windows PCs (using Siemens NX and OrCAD respectively)

Siemens NX used to be available on macOS, up until about 5-6 years ago. However, Siemens found few customers were adopting it, so they discontinued it.

Apparently, one of the reasons for its lack of adoption, was lack of a native macOS GUI – instead it ran under X11. https://community.sw.siemens.com/s/question/0D54O000061xMQgS...

If Apple really cared about it, I'm sure they could have worked out some deal with Siemens to keep the macOS edition viable, even improve its UI to be native and more usable. It would require them to move away from viewing themselves just as a customer, into more seeing it as an investment into their own platform (making it viable for more use cases.) Sad to say, Apple doesn't seem to think like that much (or maybe some people there do, but not the people whose opinions really count)

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#258

Post by muro »

brailsafe wrote: post #227
softjobs wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hot off CES: "The ViewFinity S9 (Model Number: S90PC) is Samsung’s newest addition to its monitor lineup. It features a 5K 27” screen for the first time and is optimized for creative professionals such as graphic designers and photographers. Its 5,120 x 2,880 resolution combined with its wide color gamut of 99% DCI-P3, provides crisp and true-to-form details, and its average Delta E ≦ 2[1] color accuracy also produce…

Wow, that's extremely timely and is pretty much exactly what I was hoping someone would link to correct me. I'll keep my eye on that, thanks. I'd personally still only be in the market for a >27" size, just because I feel like 27" is too small, but this would open the floor for competition in that range. I really like the 30" Ultrasharp, and would consider a 32" as long as the resolution, connectivity, pixel density,…

Dell announced a 32" 6k monitor, so it might be possible to go larger without paying 6k Apple.

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#259

Post by jsjohnst »

softjobs wrote: post #216
jsjohnst wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is about to change with higher spec connectors being more widely available. Thunderbolt 3 has been around for over five years on mainstream Mac (and Windows) machines, so what’s the excuse again? I can count the number of monitors in the same resolution space (or higher) on one hand! ;) There’s the insanely priced XDR 6K, there’s the not much better priced Dell 8K, then there’s the LG 5K that’s cheap plastic b…

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34222687

Ok, so one more! Good to know and thank you, but my point still remains. :)

Re: What’s Left in the Apple Silicon Transition

#260

Post by jsjohnst »

muro wrote: post #258
brailsafe wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, that's extremely timely and is pretty much exactly what I was hoping someone would link to correct me. I'll keep my eye on that, thanks. I'd personally still only be in the market for a >27" size, just because I feel like 27" is too small, but this would open the floor for competition in that range. I really like the 30" Ultrasharp, and would consider a 32" as long as the resolution, connectivity, pixel density,…

Dell announced a 32" 6k monitor, so it might be possible to go larger without paying 6k Apple.

Have you seen that thing? There’s fugly, then there’s outright “WTF, this is an April Fools, right?! Right!?”.
Post reply on HN