Live data from Hacker News

Apple orders entire supply of TSMC's 3nm chips for iPhone 15 Pro and M3 Macs

macrumors.com

241–250 of 467 posts

Re: Apple orders entire supply of TSMC's 3nm chips for iPhone 15 Pro and M3 Macs

#241
post #100
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not the first time I've heard of TSMC reserving a very large portion of their production capacity for a single customer, especially in the early days of a new process node. I guess there's an inherent risk in being the launch customer for a new node (unexpected delays, low yield, bugs, etc.) that can only be offset by exceptionally large volume. Maybe there's a gentleman's agreement among Apple, Samsung, AMD…

Another part of the reason is that Apple reportedly bankrolls a large amount of the R&D for new nodes for TSMC

Bingo. TSMC doesn't just give Apple preferential treatment out of the bottom of their heart - Apple pays handsomely for it!

Re: Apple orders entire supply of TSMC's 3nm chips for iPhone 15 Pro and M3 Macs

#242
post #210

Do we know if Apple is getting rid of the notch for M3 macbooks in favor of the "dynamic island" solution from iPhone 14 Pro?

that would make no sense in the context of a MacBook. The phone notch and dynamic island is a freestanding element. The notch on the MacBooks is embedded in the menubar. There would be no “island”. It might be possible for Apple to add Live Activities to the notch on the MacBook (That is what those dynamic notices are called) but only if more software publishers put in the effort.

Re: Apple orders entire supply of TSMC's 3nm chips for iPhone 15 Pro and M3 Macs

#243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting article, thanks for that. One of my key takeaways is the iPod represented not one but multiple simultaneous tech revolutions. Consumer storage until then unseen, paired with material and interface design that companies hadn't considered a priority.

I forget the exact timeline, but I think part of it too was music pricing. Physical media (tapes, records) had gotten very expensive, and almost everyone was pirating MP3s from Napster etc. Apple's iTunes prices were low enough that it became simpler just to buy stuff legally than pirate it. I can't recall if iTunes was introduced at exact same time as iPod not not. Google search suggests it may have been 1 or 2 year…

> but if so then where were people originally getting music to put on iPods

The first iPod was a Mac-only Firewire device. "You need a Mac with Firewire support to even use this thing" set a minimum platform spec that also made other things implicit — in this case, the availability of a CD-ROM drive. (Which wasn't a given in 2001, but was a given on any Mac that had Firewire support.)

iTunes the software was introduced alongside the iPod; but the iTunes Music Store was not. iTunes was, at first, a CD ripping program (and library manager for music ripped from CD.) To buy music for your iPod, you'd go to the record store, buy a CD, put it in your Mac, rip it, and then load it onto the iPod.

And while, yes, music piracy slightly predated the iTunes Music Store, there were a lot of people buying iPods in that era who had fancy Mac computers, but just plain didn't have internet service to their homes, and so for whom music piracy wasn't really a possibility†. 2001 was an interesting time; Internet access was still very unevenly distributed, and in ways that had nothing to do with economic conditions. Rural areas might have phone lines so bad that even a 28.8kbps modem wouldn't work over them. The rollout of ISDN was only just getting started, and was limited to regions with less red tape (much like fiber rollouts in the last decade.)

† Well, okay, a different form of music piracy was probably happening in these Internet-starved areas: if you were willing to shell out for a CD burner for your Mac (not an internal option, rather an external SCSI-over-Firewire one), then you could also use iTunes to burn those ripped songs back onto a mix-tape CD — and then you could give them to your friends, who could in turn rip them to their PCs. Shame about the quality loss in the process (given iTunes' default ripping encoding of 128kbps AAC — though 256kbps AAC was possible even back then), but it'd be no worse than what dubbing between literal compact cassettes would get you, and certainly better than what you'd get by downloading the Napster-standard 96kbps MP3. (And CD-to-CD streaming bitwise dubbing was also possible back then, too, but not with iTunes, only expensive third-party software; I don't think anyone but professional bootleggers had any reason to try that for music. It was more a thing for ensuring you get clean working copies of PC "must have the CD-ROM in to play" games.)

Re: Apple orders entire supply of TSMC's 3nm chips for iPhone 15 Pro and M3 Macs

#244
post #91
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know zero people with a 8k display, I wouldn't call that a significant new feature.

I know people have made naive comments about computers for years, "why would you ever need more than 8MB of RAM?", etc But I genuinely believe 4k is the upper limit where you stop seeing benefits in increased resolution for a monitor. Our eyes do have limits after all! I have pretty good vision and 4k is enough, and at that point I'd prefer focus on other aspects of picture quality like color accuracy and higher refr…

For the unvarnished truth about when resolution is good enough, look at what Apple calls Retina. 4K at 21-inch, 5k at 27-inches, 6k at 32-inches. The resolution for all those displays is good enough to stop individual pixel perception. That's the best idea of what's good enough.

Re: Apple orders entire supply of TSMC's 3nm chips for iPhone 15 Pro and M3 Macs

#245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just about the resolution, it's about physical area. My plan is to buy a 65" or 75" 8k TV and use it as computer monitor. I'll have a screen that is as big as my desk. A display of that size will allow me to have my IDE, source control, terminals, log files, the app that I'm developing, my email, the CI dashboard all visible at the same time. Of course I'll mainly use the bottom center of the huge display, b…

> My plan is to buy a 65" or 75" 8k TV and use it as computer monitor. I'll have a screen that is as big as my desk. How far away are you going to sit??

Normal desktop monitor viewing distance (at the back of an 80cm deep desk), but I'm going to use it at 1x scaling. 65" will probably make the text too small -- I think the ideal resolution would be an ~80" display, but 75" and 85" TVs would be wider than my desk.

Re: Apple orders entire supply of TSMC's 3nm chips for iPhone 15 Pro and M3 Macs

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>no faster In terms of latency it's usually slower by an order of magnitude. There should be a law that mandates developers to use at least two generations older hardware than the average consumer.

I want my ps2 keyboard port back

USB doesn't have to be this slow. Some slowness is required, but not this much. (And USB3 doesn't have to be slower than PS2.)

What we get is a result of nobody on the entire stack giving a shit. It's not a technological limitation.

Re: Apple orders entire supply of TSMC's 3nm chips for iPhone 15 Pro and M3 Macs

#247

>Apple’s iPod, by comparison, was made far more pocketable thanks to the inclusion of a 1.8-inch Toshiba hard drive. The story behind how Apple came to acquire these hard drives for the original iPod is interesting. >Jobs had expressed interest in building a portable music player in late 2000 and had tasked Jon Rubinstein with making it happen. The problem, however, was that Jobs wanted a player that was small and sl…

"No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." - Rob Malda

Re: Apple orders entire supply of TSMC's 3nm chips for iPhone 15 Pro and M3 Macs

#248
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You care about the process node as a main feature? Really? I mean, it's nice and all, but the MAIN FEATURE?

Yes, as computers don't really get faster anymore, and I travel all the time (right now writing this from a hotel restaurant), the biggest change I notice is in battery time, which depends on energy efficiency improvements that usually come with process node change. I'm not being sarcastic.

Why then don’t you say

“I generally care about battery life as the main feature of a computer.”

?

Re: Apple orders entire supply of TSMC's 3nm chips for iPhone 15 Pro and M3 Macs

#249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not true? For example, I think the first TSMC 4nm chip was by Mediatek, not Apple.

4nm is a 5nm derivative node

What's the evidence this is both true and matters to the original claim? In some sense all nodes will be derivative of the previous one, as they never reinvent the wheel completely.

Re: Apple orders entire supply of TSMC's 3nm chips for iPhone 15 Pro and M3 Macs

#250
post #11

> Compared to 5nm process, the first-generation 3nm process can reduce power consumption by up to 45%, improve performance by 23% and reduce area by 16% compared to 5nm, while the second-generation 3nm process is to reduce power consumption by up to 50%, improve performance by 30% and reduce area by 35%. What kind of real-world impact are we likely to see on the 3nm chips for the new iPhone and M3 macs? These figures…

For the first year or so, the experience of using these 3nm machines will be unparalleled. Then after most devs switched to using M3 Macs, app performance will regress back to the baseline, making everything slow on M1/M2 machines, and basically unusable on Intel Macs. Paraphrasing the old saying: "What TSMC giveth, Electron taketh"

This doesn’t make sense. VS Code works fine on a 2010 iMac that’s so old that Apple doesn’t support the OS anymore.

I’m starting to see less software support, though. I should put Linux on it.

Post reply on HN