Live data from Hacker News

Apple Mac Studio

apple.com

111–120 of 734 posts

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#111
post #84

I am genuinely crestfallen that there was no update to Mac Mini. That thing has the right balance for most computer science folks who want a Mac. Not everyone needs/runs a silicon Godzilla on their desk after all. As of the current lineup, Mini is still stuck with 16 GB RAM and a disappointing number of ports.

There's only a gap of roughly $500 between a maxed out mini and the entry studio, so perhaps the studio is the answer to what you're looking for?

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#112
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well crazy mac hardware is actually not very good compared to PC graphic cards.

The comparison chart for the high spec M1 Ultra was using a 3090. So even if it "only" reaches 3060 levels of performance in games, I think many people would be okay with that. Reality will likely place it somewhere between a 3060 and the 3090.

So 3090 price for 3060 performance, doesn't sound very promising. I wish we could exploit those gpus easier for compute, but compute with metal is simply not there, at least for now.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#113

I would like to highlight just how much Apple is focusing on their customers and use cases right now. It seems that they're targeting products to what their professional customers actually want. And in this case, it's a 3.7" little thing that can process 18 streams of 8k video (fully specced out). That's kinda crazy, and they're doing it at a price point that's competitive compared to all of the companies out there.…

"Creatives" don't want a stylus or touchscreen to do their creative stuff?

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#114
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They literally said in the keynote that the new Mac Pro is in the pipeline

Right, but the keynote is marketing. And they've been saying that for, what, nearly a decade now? [0] And in that time they have chipped away at that segment from different directions, with the iMac Pro and the Mac Studio. The latter of which is a beast already. What's left? Render farms, scaleable computing. I guess I think there will be some sort of new machine in that segment. But I figure it's not going to be wha…

[deleted]

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#115
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There has to be overhead to not have to deal with the multi-cpu architecture in software. It's impressive

Though maybe we can get some NUMA-like affinity control for the M1 Ultra, so HPC control freaks can finally tune the fuck out of this hardware.

I'm actually curious about memory.

Since they're 2 distinct chips, will a single chip be able to handle 128GB? Not sure how the interconnect works.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#116
post #86
post #49

Good to see the kind of computer we can all afford in ten years or so.

This is not really geared towards 'all'. You can see that on the presentation and who they had talking.

You missed the "ten years from now". I will happily pay $300-#400 for this machine 10 years from now to use as a random streaming box sat in a closet.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#117
post #84

I am genuinely crestfallen that there was no update to Mac Mini. That thing has the right balance for most computer science folks who want a Mac. Not everyone needs/runs a silicon Godzilla on their desk after all. As of the current lineup, Mini is still stuck with 16 GB RAM and a disappointing number of ports.

What update were they going to do? Make an M1 Max model? That would cut into sales for the base Studio.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the Mac Pro is almost like a phantom product at this point. Or a riff. Like they're going to say "the new Mac Pro is there is no more Mac Pro". What can they really do, in a single machine, that is more "Pro" than the Studio? How are they going to bring developers along when most aren't developing for twenty-core machines? I still think something else is coming. Maybe something unconventionally stackable. Som…

> What can they really do, in a single machine, that is more "Pro" than the Studio? I'm guessing the Mac Pro will focus more on Upgradability and adding expansion slots? That seems like a direction Apple is willing to go tbh.

Connecting additional devices was the second thing talked about in the introduction, after power & performance. If anything, the focus on upgradability is growing.

And I bet the Studio is a way to release what they've done so far to serve a subset of the Pro market that has simpler expansion needs. The Pro likely requires a ton more work.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#119
post #84

I am genuinely crestfallen that there was no update to Mac Mini. That thing has the right balance for most computer science folks who want a Mac. Not everyone needs/runs a silicon Godzilla on their desk after all. As of the current lineup, Mini is still stuck with 16 GB RAM and a disappointing number of ports.

> Not everyone needs/runs a silicon Godzilla

Right, which is why the Mini exists.

> Mini is still stuck with 16 GB RAM and a disappointing number of ports.

Because people who need more are expected to buy the Studio.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#120
post #84

I am genuinely crestfallen that there was no update to Mac Mini. That thing has the right balance for most computer science folks who want a Mac. Not everyone needs/runs a silicon Godzilla on their desk after all. As of the current lineup, Mini is still stuck with 16 GB RAM and a disappointing number of ports.

WWDC is a few months away. There might be a refresh of the Mini there? If we don't see a refresh of the mini this year, I can't see them not upgrading it for M2 next year.
Post reply on HN