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

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

macrumors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 467 posts

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

#331

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

ar_lan wrote: post #240
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Apple's iTunes prices were low enough that it became simpler just to buy stuff legally than pirate it. I think this is why Spotify/Netflix are so successful. Streaming a good amount of content for a reasonable price is more convenient + less time wasted (+ less stress and moral implications) compared to pirating. I used to pirate music/videos all the time and the moment those services were available I stopped becau…

I remember wanting to watch the HBO "Rome" TV series when I didn't have HBO, so therefore downloading it from usenet in some weird text format - had to combine multiple large downloaded chunks using some tool chain I forget (I think rar was involved). Now, that was painful. Nowadays I'll happily throw a few bucks to whatever streaming service to watch what I want on my Roku TV.

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

#332

Post by layer8 »

notjustanymike wrote: post #89
bookofjoe wrote: post #51

>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…

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 bought an Archos Jukebox portable MP3 player refurbished with a 20 GB HDD (2.5") in June 2001 (original 6 GB release was December 2000). While not as pocketable and sleek as the iPod, when the iPod came out it was too little (storage, interoperability) too late for me.

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

#334

Post by nsteel »

warrenm wrote: post #270
ARandomerDude wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Speed" != "Performance" Can you elaborate?

Sure Start with processor pipelining, branch prediction, speculative execution, etc Then move to multiple CPUs/CPU cores A practically-linear program (ie hardly any unpredictable branching) can be run ~5x faster on a 5-stage-pipelined CPU than an unpipelined CPU Liekwise, parallelizable tasks can benefit from multiple CPUs/cores, whereas non-parallelizable tasks will not (much) And then you have performance-per-watt…

All true in the general case. But in the context of comparing silicon nodes (this case, seemingly), the terms "speed" and "performance" are interchangeable and mean exactly the same thing.

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

#335

Post by rcarr »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #268
rcarr wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rust community seem to be leading the fightback on this but I think it'll be about 5 years before there's a big switch over. If I owned a popular electron app, I would definitely be thinking about starting to write a Rust version or migrating to Tauri because if you're not then somebody will be. Once that Rust version hits feature parity with your core functionality people will end up jumping ship for the faster,…

> If I owned a popular electron app, I would definitely be thinking about starting to write a Rust version or migrating to Tauri because if you're not then somebody will be. Once that Rust version hits feature parity with your core functionality people will end up jumping ship for the faster, shinier version, just like people jumped ship from Atom to VSCode. Sublime Text was always faster than all of these (and still…

> Sublime Text was always faster than all of these (and still is) but that’s not why people are picking text editors.

Personally, I think VSCode has massive adoption because it's free and it's easiest to configure which both appeal to newcomers. The other camp that like VSCode are the nomads who like to work in the cloud. The senior devs I've met generally prefer either Jetbrains or Sublime, depending on if they like a maximal or minimal setup. And then there's the hardcore camp who can get on with Vim and Emacs. I don't know how the latter do it personally, I've tried multiple times to get something similar in functionality to Sublime/VSCode with them and it is always a monumentally frustrating fuck about.

> Tauri is great for certain use cases but it’s not even close to a replacement for Electron at this point (having used both).

I agree but it will definitely be ready within 5 years.

> Optimizing for speed above all else is the kind of thing that appeals to a subset of programmers, but most people just don’t care about at all as long as it’s fast enough. Products like VSCode are more than fast enough for all but a few people who like to count milliseconds.

I do agree with this to an extent but another reason I'm a big Sublime Text fan is the interface. I really appreciate the lack of screen clutter compared to VSCode and especially compared to Jetbrains.

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

#336

Post by elteto »

virtuallynathan wrote: post #276
newaccount74 wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Might take about 10 minutes to migrate your mouse from one corner to the other!

The mouse will have offspring and die before reaching the other side.

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

#337

Post by helf »

cubefox wrote: post #72
helf wrote: 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?

I first thought it was sarcasm. (Like someone who says: "the main thing I like about iPhones is their single core performance")

I briefly thought that. Then posted my comment anyways and.. wasn’t disappointed. Lol

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

#338

Post by dev_tty01 »

adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #238
manmal wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please elaborate. IO is really not an issue in the M* machines I‘ve used - on the contrary.

none of the M1 laptops let you use multiple external monitors and all of the M1 products have much lower limits on storage than PCs.

Not true. Depending upon the processor choice, M1, M1 pro, or M1 max, you get 1, 2, or 4 external monitors. Up to 64 GB ram. Do you really need more than 64 GB? The number of users who actually need more are a very small part of the market.

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

#339

Post by edude03 »

coder543 wrote: post #176
edude03 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that we're talking about the 'iPod' & Apple and not the 'iRiver xyz' I think shows it made a big difference. Yes, I know, survivorship bias, but apple has a history of not releases products unless they think they're good enough (for their own definition of good) and if apple hadn't had found a way to make it store enough songs to be a differentiator we probably would never have heard of the iPod, nor would w…

> I think shows it made a big difference No, it doesn't. It shows that something made a big difference, but that thing absolutely does not have to be the amount of storage.

To be more clear, I think apple wouldn't have made the iPod at all unless they got the storage where they wanted it. So maybe the amount of storage didn't matter to users in the end (anecdotally it did to me but anyway) the product probably wouldn't have existed until some other storage revolution happened.

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

#340

Post by xiphias2 »

Someone wrote: post #248
xiphias2 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.” ?

I trust more TSMC process numbers (for large changes, not the 4nm bulls*t) more than battery life published by a PR/marketing team for my buying decisions. They are much harder to fake. And sure, performance/watt is what matters generally, which is again hard to compare between brands and marketing teams.
Post reply on HN