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

Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

docker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 129 posts

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#111

Post by aparashk »

offtop5 wrote: post #32

Can we give them a full month to sort this out ? I want x64 docker on Arm , as this could also be massive for server power consumption. But things take time . If your some wiz kid who can crack this puzzle you’ll have a billion dollar startup within 6 months As someone who’s published on the App Store , having a single binary run on IPhone , IPad and Mac is a much much bigger deal than most of you realize .

What is the x64 on ARM opportunity in a bit more detail? What would drive a billion dollar valuation for such a business?

I would have thought that anything of lasting interest would be available in source code and thus ported to run natively on ARM...

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#113

Post by lowdose »

mrtksn wrote: post #54
lsllc wrote: post #17

Sounds a bit like Docker is at a loss. Caught between a closed source OS (rock) and an architecture change (hard place). Ideally, they could leverage Rosetta2 to run x64 containers under macOS on Apple Silicon ... but I guess Apple isn't playing ball (because otherwise they would have probably announced it at WWDC). At this point I see an Apple Silicon based Mac is just a consumer device, I don't think I'm going to b…

> At this point I see an Apple Silicon based Mac is just a consumer device Not everyone runs Docker or similar to do their work. If it turns out that Apple’s performance claims are true, I don’t see people easily letting it go, a snappy machine is a serious advantage. After all, we are in this deep trouble because of the endless layers of abstraction, so I don’t see it getting any speedier anytime soon for the status…

> Mac prices are the gatekeeper for the Apple dev ecosystem in the developing world or students from low income background

Isn't the yearly $199 developers fee a greater gatekeeper by design for people with a low income from participating in Apples ecosystem?

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#115

Post by offtop5 »

aparashk wrote: post #111
offtop5 wrote: post #32

Can we give them a full month to sort this out ? I want x64 docker on Arm , as this could also be massive for server power consumption. But things take time . If your some wiz kid who can crack this puzzle you’ll have a billion dollar startup within 6 months As someone who’s published on the App Store , having a single binary run on IPhone , IPad and Mac is a much much bigger deal than most of you realize .

What is the x64 on ARM opportunity in a bit more detail? What would drive a billion dollar valuation for such a business? I would have thought that anything of lasting interest would be available in source code and thus ported to run natively on ARM...

Because years , if not decades of legacy server code could be ran on Arm without re-writing anything.

An EC2 rival could run the same processes using 30% of the power. Plus as ARM tends to run on much smaller devices, you could theoretically save tons of physical space with data centers.

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#116

Post by fiddlerwoaroof »

viraptor wrote: post #110
fiddlerwoaroof wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aws Graviton2 images. It’s exciting to finally have ARM consumer laptops: it’ll encourage people to port applications to ARM which will make it easier to take advantage of cheap ARM servers.

> It’s exciting to finally have ARM consumer laptops: Apple may be the loudest and now the fastest available, but the ARM consumer laptops existed for some time already. For example https://www.lenovo.com/au/en/laptops/ideapad/ideapad-s-serie...

Sure, historically Apple makes the first device in various categories that achieves wide consumer adoption.

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#117

Post by mrtksn »

lowdose wrote: post #113
mrtksn wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At this point I see an Apple Silicon based Mac is just a consumer device Not everyone runs Docker or similar to do their work. If it turns out that Apple’s performance claims are true, I don’t see people easily letting it go, a snappy machine is a serious advantage. After all, we are in this deep trouble because of the endless layers of abstraction, so I don’t see it getting any speedier anytime soon for the status…

> Mac prices are the gatekeeper for the Apple dev ecosystem in the developing world or students from low income background Isn't the yearly $199 developers fee a greater gatekeeper by design for people with a low income from participating in Apples ecosystem?

It's $99 and it's not a gatekeeper to anything. People who need the developer program subscription easily make multiple of it each month even in the poorest countries. You only need it if you are going to distribute apps through Apple AppStore, you don't need it for anything else.

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#118

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

raverbashing wrote: post #103
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That requires that ARM images are available, which will take time and always have a disconnect. It also violates the idea of being able to run the exact same image on your laptop (ARM Mac) and in prod (x86 server).

> It also violates the idea of being able to run the exact same image on your laptop (ARM Mac) and in prod (x86 server). 99% of people are running node/python/RoR/PHP on Ubuntu/Debian/Arch. It works the same for most cases. (possible caveat: I'm not sure if numpy and TensorFlow is supported already but it probably is) But for basic stuff, it's a non-issue

You still can't use the same container image across architectures, even if the important parts are interpreted code. You can package the architecture-independent parts for both x86 and ARM, of course, but as you sort of touch on, that still leaves dependency issues and surprise differences in the platform ("oh look, this is so fast on my mac where there's hardware acceleration for the C library used in this hot path" followed 3 weeks later by, "why is this so slow on our x86 servers?").

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#119

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

viraptor wrote: post #109
vbezhenar wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can run on ARM servers in production. They're even cheaper than x86 servers. (Though also slower, at least AWS's version.) Where can I buy ARM server comparable with x86 server on performance? I'm not interested with clouds, I want bare metal server. I'm not aware of any server brand like HP or Dell producing ARM servers. I'm also not aware of any CPU manufacturer producing computer desktops with ARM comparable…

> I'm not interested with clouds, I want bare metal server. You can have both. https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/now-available-bare-metal-ar...

I promise that is not what 90% of people mean when they say they want bare metal, and not what 99% of people mean when they say they don't want "cloud"; it's still AWS's machine.

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#120

Post by viraptor »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #119
viraptor wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not interested with clouds, I want bare metal server. You can have both. https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/now-available-bare-metal-ar...

I promise that is not what 90% of people mean when they say they want bare metal, and not what 99% of people mean when they say they don't want "cloud"; it's still AWS's machine.

Honestly, if they mean "owned machine in colo" they should say that rather than "bare metal". Those are orthogonal concepts. (You can have VM instances on a private cloud on owned machines as well)

If you're actually interested in buying servers this is not a pedantic difference.

Post reply on HN